Women's Rights and Religion

[Bipolar Bob]

I don't think there are any women's rights in any modern religion. From the misogyny of Buddhism to the the patriarchal culture of Christianity, women have had it pretty bad in most religions. In most religions, women are at the lowest rung in the totem pole.

Yet some religions insist that they give women proper respect and ensure her of rights such as when a Muslim insists that women have rights in Islam because women are allowed to inherit property or when Christians insist women have rights because the Bible allows her to have a job selling crafts.

Are these truly rights? If you were to loosen the chains of a slave, allowing that slave to walk 10 feet more are you really giving that slave rights?

A women or a man for that matter canonly truly be said to have rights when they have the right to determine their own destiny. I see none of that in the more patriarchal Abrahamic religions and I certainly do not see it in Buddhism or Hinduism either. In all these religions, men and women are bound to traditions and culture that saps them of the right to self-determination. Their roles as man and women have been predetermined by doctrine and enforced by clergy and layman alike.

How can anyone say that religion ensures that rights of anyone when religion predetermines your course of action, the thoughts you have and your ultimate destiny? It is impossible.

So to those of you who are religious, please show me how religion ensures rights for women or men. Because it seems to me the only thing religion ensures is the enslavement of both.

[MindForgedManacle]

Christianity isn't clear cut (Scripturally) against women. There are passages that affirm no priority between men and women. There are passages against this, but the usual one pointed out from Paul's letters (about women and authority) is probably a later interpolation. There were some pro-women stuff in some sects of earlier Christianity, but clearly that didn't last.

[freedomfromforum]

When I was a Christian I would not allow a woman to have authority over me in the church. That really fucked with the female pastors heads.

[Bipolar Bob]

Christianity isn't clear cut (Scripturally) against women. There are passages that affirm no priority between men and women. There are passages against this, but the usual one pointed out from Paul's letters (about women and authority) is probably a later interpolation. There were some pro-women stuff in some sects of earlier Christianity, but clearly that didn't last.

This is one of the point in which Christianity get contradictory. At several points in Paul's letters, Paul preaches that women are equal to men in the eyes of God but elsewhere in scripture including some of Paul's letters, we are told that they are not equal to men. It is a contradiction that is often overlooked.

And yes, some of the more Gnostic sects treated women as equals but there were Gnostic sects that were even more oppressive than orthodox Christianity whereas they preached like Buddha did, that women were the root of all evil.

[CleanShavenJesus]

Christianity isn't clear cut (Scripturally) against women. There are passages that affirm no priority between men and women. There are passages against this, but the usual one pointed out from Paul's letters (about women and authority) is probably a later interpolation. There were some pro-women stuff in some sects of earlier Christianity, but clearly that didn't last.

Both Timothy and Corinthians state that women are inferior to men, are must remain silent (both in church, and just in general.)

[thesummerqueen]

Reform Judaism is trying pretty hard to cherry-pick their way out of the misogyny.

[Captain Colostomy]

The Buddha said wut?

[Bipolar Bob]

The Buddha said wut?

Siddhartha at first claimed that women were incapable of becoming "enlightened", that they were a distraction from "enlightenment" within themselves and were the reason that mankind fails to achieve "enlightenment"

The Buddha was a misogynist.

[Captain Colostomy]

The Buddha said wut?

Siddhartha at first claimed that women were incapable of becoming "enlightened", that they were a distraction from "enlightenment" within themselves and were the reason that mankind fails to achieve "enlightenment"

The Buddha was a misogynist.

Hardly, but it's not worth quote bombing here. The fact many ethnic buddhists use cultural bias even today to marginalize women does little to help my position, so I'll drop the objection.

[FiniteImmortal]

I don't think there are any women's rights in any modern religion. From the misogyny of Buddhism to the the patriarchal culture of Christianity, women have had it pretty bad in most religions. In most religions, women are at the lowest rung in the totem pole.

Yet some religions insist that they give women proper respect and ensure her of rights such as when a Muslim insists that women have rights in Islam because women are allowed to inherit property or when Christians insist women have rights because the Bible allows her to have a job selling crafts.

Are these truly rights? If you were to loosen the chains of a slave, allowing that slave to walk 10 feet more are you really giving that slave rights?

A women or a man for that matter canonly truly be said to have rights when they have the right to determine their own destiny. I see none of that in the more patriarchal Abrahamic religions and I certainly do not see it in Buddhism or Hinduism either. In all these religions, men and women are bound to traditions and culture that saps them of the right to self-determination. Their roles as man and women have been predetermined by doctrine and enforced by clergy and layman alike.

How can anyone say that religion ensures that rights of anyone when religion predetermines your course of action, the thoughts you have and your ultimate destiny? It is impossible.

So to those of you who are religious, please show me how religion ensures rights for women or men. Because it seems to me the only thing religion ensures is the enslavement of both.

To respond to this topic, the need to define what a "right" is instantly arises. What is a right? The question you ask has an automatic implication that "rights" exist, and that they are a "good" thing. If rights exist, where do they come from? What makes is "wrong" to infringe upon a right? There is immediately the requirement to acknowledge that if there is such a thing an an absolute right, the concept of Absolute has to be real. If rights are "unalienable", they are given to us by our creator, the question is then, is our creator an infinite intelligence, or a product of the law of physics?

If rights aren't unalienable, and only granted in context of society and whatever group is in power, then we shouldn't use the word "right"; some other term would be way less confusing.

So, your question about Women having an "unalienable right" to do this or that has little bearing on an Atheist board. The question of Women having a "societal right" has much more relevance here, but not to me, because I don't worry about what is popular or currently voted on by the tribe as to what ought to be. The tribe will a way oppress someone, if no women are around, we will oppress each other in endless ways.

As to a non-moral framework lending Womenhood any reverence or esteem, that has to be done ad hock. There is no epistimilogical basis to do so. I don't see a rational way an atheistic framework can give essential worth to Womenhood or humanity at all. It is only in context of a transcendent framework that you can arrive at a "right" as in the classical definition, and was in fact at the core of the founder's worldview who penned the Constitution, which is a rule-set detailing what government can and can not infringe upon. The rights were always assumed to be unalienable.

So, in a purely material universe, a women is nothing more than a weaker-man, less hearty and emotionally driven, less adept at hunting and gathering, useful for her vagina and birthing abilities, with some pleasure mixed in for fun. There exists no provision for her in reality other than societal constructs to protect and cherish her. There exist nothing for any of us, for that matter, aside from being the fittest. It has been tried since the dawn of humanity, the only way to think correctly about ourselves and lead to an increase in happiness and individual liberty is to uphold a transcendent framework.

At the core of your question, there is the obvious objection to the mishandling of the the fairer sex over the centuries, which is human nature repeating itself. I know of NO other worldview in existence, other than Christianity, that lends the Majesty and Mystique to Womenhood that she deserves. A material universe gives her nothing. If there really isn't anything else, then fine. But, lets end the silly discussion of "rights".