Is Christianity responsible for denying women's rights?

[Flail]

The political history of the United States includes relatively few women compared to the number of men. Women did not have the right to vote for the first 140 years of our existence as a country. No woman has ever held the office of President or Vice President and very few have served in high office. Women's history as leaders in Christianity is similarly deficient.

Often we hear criticisms of Islam for treating women as second class citizens. Is Christianity the same, having advanced further to combat religious discrimination against women by reason of simply getting an earlier start?

Question for debate: Is Christianity responsible for the shameful history of women's rights in America?

[notachance]

You do realize that NONE of the words in the Bible are the teachings of Christ, right? Because none of the people who wrote the Bible ever met Jesus Christ, or ever met anybody who had ever met Jesus Christ.

if only the BILLIONS on top of BILLIONS of christians that have existed throughout time could have met you first.

Actually, most educated Christians are aware of this. There are footnotes to that effect in most versions of the Bible. Your ignorance is actually quite rare.

what if i told you that abraham lincoln emancipated the slaves? would you doubt what i said because i never met him or never met anybody who met him?

Nope. Because there is extensive corroborating evidence of the veracity of your claim. To the contrary, there is NOTHING IN THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE except for the Bible, making supernatural claims about Jesus.

weve got all these black folks living the dream as evidence of their emancipation, but youre gonna say "im not taking your word for it because you never met the man!" LOL!

You're exactly right. If I denied the emancipation despite the overwhelming evidence, I'd be an idiot. But there is no overwhelming evidence that Mary was a virgin. Just the words in a book written decades after Jesus died, by an anonymous scribe who never met Jesus and never met Mary. Furthermore, this outlandish claim flies in the face of everything we know about biology.

but surely youre going to say something ridiculous like "all the christians in the world are just believing ancient barbarians and theyre all duped. their existence isnt evidence of anything but their own foolishness."

Well, surely the fact that a lot of people believe something isn't evidence that it's true. But even if it was, there are more non-Christians in the world than there are Christians, so by that logic, the fact that Christians are a tiny minority would indicate that their beliefs are false.

give it a rest man. instead of ranting with the same lines over and over again why not try backing something up.

Give me an example of a claim I didn't back up.

[notachance]

The point that really needs to be emphasized is that those individuals who don't pay an income tax need to have stake in the game. It's ironic that these individuals are those who utilize public services the most, yet pay little to nothing to maintain these public services.

Read Matthew 25:31-46, the parable of the Sheep and the Goats.

If Jesus Christ needed to utilize those public services but could pay little to nothing to maintain those public services, would you help Jesus, or would you scorn him and find his situation "ironic"?

"Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me". Matthew 25:45

You only have two options Winepusher: Renounce Christianity, or develop some compassion for the poor.

[Flail]

The bottom 50% pays zero tax.

Sir, that is PATENTLY FALSE. There are sales taxes on EVERYTHING these people buy. You bought the conservative line hook, line and sinker.

I won't do your research for you, but you should google these issues and broaden your scope...dude.

I was speaking of inequality of tax...as per the tax code...as in income tax dude...taxing effort...taxing success...of course sales taxes and all sorts of other taxes are born equally by all who make a choice to purchase...no sales tax on food...but if you smoke or drink or purchase luxury items there are tax consequences....and they are equal in percentage...but of course if you spend more you are taxed more....

but as to income tax....government taxing the employment efforts of its citizens, statistics show that the top 5% of earners pay 54% of all the incomes tax. The top 1% pay 34% of all income taxes paid. My point is that we are already taxing the job creators enough...especially in times when we need more job creation...more risk taking...if you need a job, you must have an employer...or employ yourself....sending more and more money to this government will get us deeper and deeper in debt...the value of our money will continue to depreciate and the poor will have to pay more for everything they need....why would we send more hard earned money to a bankrupt, spending addicted government? Obama is spending triple what Bush spent...and has led us to the first downgrade of our countries credit worthiness in our history. You want to help the poor, then protect the value of our currency by supporting less govt spending, and less taxation or otherwise that loaf of bread for the soup kitchen is going to cost $10.

I am no defender of Bush...in fact the only thing I liked about Obama and one of the reasons I voted for him was his pledge to bring our soldiers home...and now we are still in Iraq...have more soldiers in Afganistan than ever...have started a war in Libya...and continued to spend billions on killing Bin Laden...billions of taxpayer dollars to kill some nomad? Really? Is that a wonderful thing?

[Flail]

notachance wrote:

... and they tell you straight up they want to abolish social security, medicaid and medicare.

Please support this assertion. I find nothing wherein the republicans running for office suggest abolishing social security or medicaid or medicare. They simply want to make some adjustments, and Obama is in agreement finally, to make the systems that supports these programs self sustaining...so they will be around for my grandkids.

[McCulloch]

Moderator Comment

Please review the Rules.


We do seem to be straying off topic. Would everyone please make some attempt to link your post to the questions raised in the OP.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.

[Flail]

show me a reference in a the bible, new testament, that scorns, or belittles women.

1 Corinthians 11:3
[font=Georgia]But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. [/font]

1 Corinthians 11:7-9
[font=Georgia]For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the womans sake, but woman for the mans sake. [/font]

1 Corinthians 14:34-35
[font=Georgia]The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. [/font]

1 Timothy 2:9-15
[font=Georgia]Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. [/font]

Well I will give you some credit.
This is from the new testament.
But it isn't the teachings of Christ or that of Christianity.
It is just some opinionated ramblings made by some random people in the bible.

I agree the quoted material are opinionated ramblings....but not of random people....they are all the pronouncements of Paul, whose views to many were formative for the Christian dogma that survives today.

A significant number of Christians worldwide are Catholic. On what basis does Catholicism insist that women have no business in the priesthood? Is it biblical...or..??

[Flail]

Flail wrote:

The bottom 50% pays zero tax.

McCulloch wrote:

Really? Do you have support for this?

I was referring to income tax. I did some research and find that the bottom 47% of US households pay no net Federal or State income tax. And that the top 5% pay 54%; the top 1% pay 34%.

[JoeyKnothead]

I was referring to income tax. I did some research and find that the bottom 47% of US households pay no net Federal or State income tax. And that the top 5% pay 54%; the top 1% pay 34%.

Kinda hard to pay income tax when you're struggling to feed, clothe, and house yourself.

Notice too, the top 54% control more than 54% of the wealth, while the top 1% control more than 34% of the wealth.

[Flail]

I was referring to income tax. I did some research and find that the bottom 47% of US households pay no net Federal or State income tax. And that the top 5% pay 54%; the top 1% pay 34%.

Kinda hard to pay income tax when you're struggling to feed, clothe, and house yourself.

Notice too, the top 54% control more than 54% of the wealth, while the top 1% control more than 34% of the wealth.

It's the nature of capitalism vs socialism. See Greece. No system is perfect. It's a matter of preference. I got up early, worked hard, spent a fortune on my college degrees, took risks, started businesses and succeeded...and created hundreds of jobs for people. I'm worn out with a life time of hard work...so I'm going fishing...I'm all for the safety net for the unfortunate...and I am all for tax exempt churches spending more for the needy....and I am really glad guys like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates give millions to charities...and that companies like Apple create millions of jobs world wide...pay millions in taxes and give generously....and my experience is that many, many people who don't have much simply made the choices that led to their circumstances...often television and dropping out and drugs and alcohol over hitting the books or kicking ass....now they look to bloated nanny state government for a hand out...supported by hard working people...hope they don't wear all of us out....their load and their whining is getting heavy, getting old.

[forumwarrior]

Yes there are submissive women who want men to be their masters.

There are also submissive slaves who want to be owned by their owners.

But the fact that such masochistic confused people exist, doesn't make sexism or slavery acceptable.

if you think its sexist to acknowledge that women fit certain roles better than men and men fit certain roles better than women, then its certainly your right to make that mistake.

but lemme tell you something. women will NEVER be like men. it doesnt matter how short they cut their hair. thats just the way things are.

i feel comfortable getting my hair cut by a woman. having a woman dentist is fine. my doctor is a female.

but i wouldnt want any female being my auto mechanic. i wouldnt want a female firefighter try to drag me out of my house. i wouldnt want and i wouldnt take orders from a female in a combat situation.

they simply dont fit the role. its silly not to acknowledge things like this. women will NEVER be on an even playing field with men.