Should man rule over women for women’s own good?
|
Should man rule over women for women’s own good?
|
 (August 20, 2014 at 8:22 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: Yes, when I'm king of the world, I shall rule over the women of the land and eat sushi upon their naked bodies! I was with you until the sushi! 
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???" 
You know beccs, I used to say the same thing. But now, addicted to the stuff.
Going to get some tomorrow evening in fact. (August 20, 2014 at 10:07 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: You know beccs, I used to say the same thing. But now, addicted to the stuff. Tried it a couple of times and really didn't like it. Might try it again. 
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???" 
vodkafan
Junior Member  Religious Views: Ask yourself what would Jesus do? Would he wear socks with sandals? No. (May 24, 2012 at 8:31 pm)Shell B Wrote: Oh, I'm well aware a "fair world" is nothing more than a quaint notion. Of course, it is okay to work towards ideals and get as close to them as possible. The goalposts of what is ideal are constantly changing too. But I think everything eventually finds its own level, as long as people are allowed the freedom to think and act for themselves. Shell B, I find I like your posts, you talk sense. Can I dominate you? 
It's not immoral to eat meat, abort a fetus or love someone of the same sex...I think that about covers it
Isn't she married to Tiberius? Is that how you spell it?
 (May 24, 2012 at 5:03 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: Should man rule over women for women’s own good? I'm not sure if you've noticed but we don't live in a world of knights and maidens any more. 'It's always been that way historically so it must be better' is a most flaccid argument for anything. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, if the thought of being a slave is abhorrent to you then do not harbour thoughts of being a master. MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
vodkafan
Junior Member Religious Views: Ask yourself what would Jesus do? Would he wear socks with sandals? No. (August 21, 2014 at 10:03 am)Losty Wrote: Isn't she married to Tiberius? Is that how you spell it? I know that. I figured she would probably realise I am joking.
It's not immoral to eat meat, abort a fetus or love someone of the same sex...I think that about covers it
 (August 21, 2014 at 12:33 pm)vodkafan Wrote: I know that. I figured she would probably realise I am joking.And then she'd beat you to death with a metal pipe anyway.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould 
I've renounced any rulership rights to which I may be entitled just to be on the safe side.
 RE: Should man rule over women for women’s own good?
August 21, 2014 at 2:07 pm
(This post was last modified: August 21, 2014 at 2:20 pm by Greatest I am.)
(August 19, 2014 at 11:41 pm)Beccs Wrote: Yeah, the bible says that. Yet most mainstream religions do not have equal rights and fail at common decency. He shall rule over you is a part of their theology. Regards DL (August 20, 2014 at 12:43 pm)orangebox21 Wrote:(May 24, 2012 at 5:03 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: What would real men do?25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. So as long as a woman never demands equality, her husband is to treat her as equal but the moment she asks to be treated equal, in church for instance, then he shall rule over you comes into play. And you see women putting up with that do you? Regards DL (August 21, 2014 at 10:16 am)ManMachine Wrote:(May 24, 2012 at 5:03 pm)Greatest I am Wrote: Should man rule over women for women’s own good? You are correct. Men have forgotten their duty to family and any Knight would be ashamed to be seen with most so called men. Not enough real men who recognize their duty is the reason women are not equal. Regards DL |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Should man rule over women for women’s own good?
