Deputy42

D-what you call misogynist, others view as proper gender roles. where shall we put the line? also, god is benevolent and good, yet god from time to time sends plagues and floods and allows evil. should we go down this road too?

i've talked about paul and the evil practice of discrimination to women all day. i think i've said it all. my argument is as follows:

1.)paul is practical and keeps with the times (note my argument about truth, and truth fit to speak)

2.)paul might have special knowledge that leads to the excellent human life. i dont think you will know until you live it whether it this is so.

3.)paul condones slavery in the bible, again a sign of the times. i'm sure you are aware that slave labor was the basis of the ancient economies of great places such as rome, athens, etc. what kind of chaos would spring forth were paul to have condemned slavery? would anyone have listened? oooooo......

4.)ultimately you view such dictates from an ethnocentric perspective. of course your culture and point of view is correct. of course your ideas are best. of course everyone else is wrong. the chinese were center of the world for 2000 years before the west stomped their asses. was the western culture at that time better than the chinese culture it replaced?

i think your main problem with this is your refusal to account for any type of benevolent spirit. this may be a function of your (i am assuming) athiestic perspective. how are you going to understand a spiritual practice, aspiritually (for lack of a better word, i cant find it in the dictionary)

Queen of Swords

How about defending the claim that these are the proper gender roles for men and women? You have not shown that there is one role that men, by virtue of their Y chromosomes and genitalia, are suited for whereas women are not suited for it.

Sure. Why does your benevolent god allow evil?

Please present your argument here.

Secondly, if he keeps with the times, then why put anything he writes into practice? After all, his "practicality" is for a different time.

If you have "lived it" and thereby have experience of this "special knowledge" and "excellent human life", please say so; otherwise, you're simply speculating.

In other words, Paul was more concerned about preserving the status quo than about upholding human rights?

I don't find this attitude admirable.

Straw person. Not to mention hyperbole.

We're not discussing Chinese culture. We're discussing a god who is supposedly omniscient and the misogyny he apparently inspired Paul to write. Please stay on the topic.

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: QueenofSwords ]</p>

Queen of Swords

There's a difference between abuse of anabolic steroids, which was the subject of your first link, and naturally produced quantities of testosterone. You will note that your second link says nothing about aggressiveness.

You are evading my questions. Are you not capable of answering them?

Then how would you determine who makes a better teacher - men or women? Besides, you're the one who brought up "different hormones" having "different effects" and the mind/body whatever.

It's simple. Think of what schools and youth groups can teach boys. Now think of what women can teach boys. Now think of some topic that neither school, youth group nor woman is capable of teaching a boy, and tell me what that topic is.

What about if a girl was raised by a single mother? Also, you have not addressed my question : since male role models teach boys about being male, are they unnecessary for girls?

Then your statement that "just as the farmer does more for the seed, the father does for the wife" is false, since you have just contradicted yourself. A man does not always do such a thing for the woman he has impregnated. And yet the baby somehow develops and is born. On the other hand, if a farmer neglects a field, it is unlikely to produce a harvest. Your analogy is, therefore, deeply flawed.

Also, it appears that the woman may indeed contribute more than the man does to a pregnancy, if all the man does is fertilize the egg. In other words, it may not be as simple as "dude puts semen in women, baby pops out".

Regarding the link you posted in answer to my request that you define the "dogma" of sexual harrassment, the link leads to a very long page that has a sprawling and seemingly interminable story. If you are capable of doing so, please post a concise reply to my question :

What is the "dogma" regarding sexual harrassment?

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: QueenofSwords ]</p>

brighid

Deputy -

No – I am not belittling you because you DECIDE to work, instead of waiting for a “handout”. I have attacked your argument (not YOU personally) because it is ill informed and poorly constructed. If you believe financial aid and scholarships are a “handout” why the hell are you complaining that it’s such an injustice that you haven’t received one? Are YOU waiting around for one? Have you applied for all the college scholarships and financial aid available to you via your school?

And YES you do afford college because you are in a higher social caste – you are the quintessential higher caste in this country whether you are willing to see this or not. You are white and you are male and that is that. You have more opportunities simply because of your white skin and your male gender. And because you have little to no idea what it is like to be looked down upon and denied opportunities exclusively based upon the ingrained prejudicial fears we are taught about blacks, other minorities and women you may have little experience to make judgments.

I certainly didn’t wait around for financial aid and scholarships. I applied for literally everything I was qualified for and some I thought I might not be in the off chance it would be awarded to me. And because of my hard work I got aid and scholarships. I also made sure I sent everything in early and didn’t wait until the last minute.

Many scholarships are privately funded and therefore they can establish any criteria they want in dolling out personal cash. Many scholarships are set up using specific criteria. Such as a scholarship my work sponsors in the name of two hockey goalies that were tragically killed in a car accident. Those applying for the scholarship must have a certain GPA, they must have graduated from the same high school as those boys did and they must have been in hockey. That high school hockey team currently has a FEMALE goalie. Is that discriminatory? Hardly. State and federal funds are dolled about by need, the greater your need financially, the greater the source. It just so happens that minorities tend to need the money more and the state has a vested interest in helping those who are at a disadvantage or impoverished receive a good education so they may advance personally, and improve the state as a whole due to their greater contributions. Education also lowers crime rates and each and every one of us has a vested interest in making sure that EVERYONE receives equal opportunities for education and advancement.

And I worked my ass off for my degree. I worked full time during the day and went to school full time at night while raising my son. I got up at 5 am every day and got home after 10 pm and by time I finished homework I went to sleep at 12 or 1 am. I graduated with honors and I didn’t have my mommy and daddy helping me in any way. I earned it, just like you are. Is my degree worth less because I got more financial assistance then you – I dare say NOT!

Nor did I state anywhere that you should be “ashamed” of your status. If anything you should be thankful that you don’t have to struggle like so many others do and that you have to opportunity to pay for you school. So many others do not! Nor should you be complaining because people other than yourself receive financial aid or scholarships that assist them with advancing their education simply because you have failed to receive the same. If there is anything you should be ashamed of it is your attitude of entitlement.

Maybe it would help you to walk in the shoes of a minority for a week. Doesn’t Jesus recommend something like that? See what it’s like. Dialogue with minorities, listen rather then defend and LEARN. Racism is a real problem for millions and millions of Americans. I work against it every day in my job assisting Hispanic and Polish immigrants that are taken advantage of in this country. It’s very real Deputy and instead being a part of the problem that only perpetuates the false ideas and the prejudicial hatreds, why don’t you be apart of the solution? Isn’t that what your religion dictates to you? Doesn’t it dictate compassion, assistance to the poor, (those who are meek and mild), to those less fortunate then you and to do so with humility and respect?

And we haven’t attacked your arguments because you are Christian, but because the arguments are fallacious and weak. It just so happens you are a Christian and unfortunately, many people who call themselves Christian espouse the same arguments that you do. The coincidence is not dictated by the atheist, it is dictated by those who perpetuate it.

In your responses you have exposed your preconceived and prejudicial notions about atheists. It does not seem you have come here to learn, but rather to exacerbate your own need to see us as the “others”, those heathen, unbelieving scum. We are a passionate bunch. We are the men and women who stand up for and defend those members of our society that are minorities. We care about the plight of the poor, the minority, the homosexual, the minority religious and the future of our country. We are educated and strong and you may not be use to the type of passion and strength that you have so richly discovered in this forum. We will challenge you at every turn, but living up to the challenge will only make you a better person. So, you can either participate this grueling course and expand your horizons or you can give into your inherited prejudices and stagnate in the loathsome cesspool of those poisonous ideologies. Are you up to the challenge?

Brighid

hezekiah jones

The chances are good.

I don't see any reason why ancient literature should be "morally difficient" per se. And there are probably cultural references in the novels of Bret Easton Ellis that I might consider "antiquated and archaic."

These are all very intriguing literary thoughts.

However, when are you going to answer my question: What makes you think the Bible was "written" as early as 4,000 years ago?

Mageth

Deputy42 said:

to attack christianity on the grounds of its doctrinal intolerance and then turn around and say that there are thoughts and opinions what we are better off without as a species, you tend to become a lot like that which you criticize.

If by "doctrinal intolerance" you mean xianity's attitude towards gender roles, then I would have to say the two actions are consistent. Xianity's "doctrinal intolerances" are an example of the "opinions" we'd be better off without.

And please explain to me how this makes me "a lot like that which I criticize."

i'm just attempting to show that your views arent that far apart. is it really that hard to see?

I think instead of "views" you may mean something else. Please define what you mean by "view."

Do you mean xianity thinks men and women should be treated equally, in marriage, school, work and everywhere else? Do you mean xianity thinks Paul's writings on the subject were/are wrong? If so, I'll agree with you.

And please cease with the "is is it really that hard to see?" crap, to me and everyone else. It's rude and annoying, and not proper in an argument. Is that too hard for you to see?

professing "free thought" is easy and popular. however few take it to its extreme, and even fewer live by its dictates.

While we're into defining, please define what you mean by "free thought," its "extreme," and its "dictates." BTW, I have not once in this thread, to my knowledge, defined myself as a "freethinker."

[edited to fix ubb goofup - I tried to put "I" within []]

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

Mageth

Deputy42:

PLEASE learn a bit about UBB code formatting! I'm beginning to wonder if you're theophilus's sock puppet. At the bottom of the "Post A Reply" page you'll find a link called "What is UBB Code?"

d-first i think you must admit that atheism is a worldview. second, the criteria used to critize other world views also apply to your worldview.

No I must not admit it, because atheism is not a worldview. When I say I'm an "atheist" I'm simply stating that I believe there is no god(s). You need to bone up on your definitions - I recommend reading up on it in the SecWeb library.

People of all sorts and with many different worldviews may be atheists. For example, I'm sure if we looked we could find examples of racist and/or sexist atheists. My attitudes on gender roles don't stem from my atheism; I held them back when I was a theist (the teachings in the bible and attitudes of the church on subjects such as gender roles and gay/lesbian rights influenced my move away from the church.)

d-the mere subject of "subjugation of women" is complex. you must make certain mental contructs and have specific mental maxims. what you call subjugation of women taken in a different context and time could just we "the way things are". i'm surprised you don't see this.

I repeat - leave off with the "i'm surprised you don't see this" crap, please.

Please tell me what you think the "certain mental constructs" and "specific mental maxims" are. Since you've introduced them in definite terms, you should be able to enumerate them.

For me, this issue is quite simple - the golden rule applies to everyone, in every situation.

Just because something was "the way things are" in a time and context does not in any way justify it. I hate to cross the "nazi" line, but anti-semitism was "the way things are" in Germany in the '30s. Slavery was "the way things are" in the southern states until the Civil War. I don't give a flying f**k about the time and context, some things are just wrong.

d-were we to engage in a systematic enumeration of your beliefs as an atheist, i believe that the very same criticisms you apply to christianity would apply equally as well to your worldview.

I'll enumerate my beliefs as an atheist for you:

&lt;list&gt;
1. There is no god.
&lt;/list&gt;

In this thread, I'm primarily criticizing xianity's institutionalized misogynism. As I am anything but a misogynist, how do the same criticism(s) apply to my worldview?

d-christians must make certain mental formulations in order to follow. you in the same way must also make formulations of the same sort to apply your epistemology and morality. what is thought bad in one generation, is the norm in another generation, and vice versa. i guess this borders on cultural relativism.

I think I see a problem we're having here. Yes, there are some things thought "bad" in one generation and "not bad" in another. Many of these things are pretty much harmless and irrelevant - styles, views on nudity, etc. No one is really "harmed" by society's holding of one view or the other. But many are harmful to at least a certain class of persons - slavery, gender bias, racism, homophobia and its associated restrictions, stoning adulterers and sabbath-breakers to death, etc. The latter class, IMO are always morally wrong - then, now and tomorrow.

the very one emotion that a WOMAN cannot experience is being a MAN. in order to experience being a MAN, the person in question must be a MAN. a WOMAN cannot at the same time be both WOMAN and MAN. therefore there is one emotion women cannot experience that men can.

"Being a man" and "Being a woman" are not emotions. If you think they are, then please define for me the qualities and expressions of these "emotions."

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

bonduca

Re: Deputy Fife's incoherent ramblings - do you think perhaps he's just stoned?

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: bonduca ]</p>

Queen of Swords

What, you mean he was a rebellious son?

Mageth

Re: Deputy Fife's incoherent ramblings - do you think perhaps he's just stoned?

Has Barney been poking around in Andy's drawers again???

"Barney, stop thayat!"