Does the New Testament contain sexism?

[Drich]

Support local businesses then

.....And where do 'local business' get the good they sell to you? It all goes back to China/Indian and other slave nations.

Nothing is mass produced in the west anymore. Industry has been up rooted and moved to slave nations.

[FatAndFaithless]

Having a learning disability is not the same as lacking education.

If one can not learn in the ways the schools have taught forever, then literally that person is without an education. Therfore a learning disablity prevents one from being educated in the way we teach our children. Most people can not afford to send their kids to the few schools who specialize in teaching kids with learning disablities.

Having a learning disability might be used by some people to define others' roles in society, but as we've established, this isn't right.

that's crap. Do you want a 'doctor' with a learning disablity to do your open heart surgery, or do you want someone who graduated at the top of his class?

They're different in the sense that one has no choice in these statuses, AND the fact that these statuses don't affect one's ability to fulfill any given role, which is the entire point of equality, trying to ensure that the most qualified person performs the role regardless of irrelevant statuses like sex or race.

It would be like saying someone's role is to stay at home and cook just because they have a penis. It doesn't make sense, and it doesn't have any bearing on their ability to cook, so why even consider that as part of role-defining?

It seems you think that soceity only divides us in areas where we have control. it doesn't. My last post demonstrates this. So my question is if we are willing to be divided in soceity where one is born one way or another, then what is the big deal here?

Drich, you're obviously not seeing the point. I'm talking about how things should be, or at least what I think is good to strive towards. Yes, currently society puts unreasonable divisions between people based on these irrelevant statuses, and that's the whole thing that we are trying to change. We aren't okay with living in the society that defines roles based on gender or race, and that's the whole point of this damn discussion.

[Drich]

The difference is that we get to choose our role in society. Not so much in religion.

Well, that's not true. i choose to be a movie star, then a rock star, then I chose to be a pilot...
None of these things happened for me. However soceity would allow me to mop floors and clean up after mechanics.

You seriously have to ask? No, I guess you would.

The core principle of morality dictates judgment of action - not of inherent properties. Something you do not have control over is something you should not be judged for. Discrimination based on race or gender goes against this principle and that is why it is unjust, demeaning and disrespectful.

That's not true at all. Would you let someone with diminished mental capasities fly a passenger jet? why not? Why is your judgement here any more valid that a call to judgement base on the inherent properties of gender?

---

Drich, you're obviously not seeing the point. I'm talking about how things should be, or at least what I think is good to strive towards. Yes, currently society puts unreasonable divisions between people based on these irrelevant statuses, and that's the whole thing that we are trying to change. We aren't okay with living in the society that defines roles based on gender or race, and that's the whole point of this damn discussion.

Your missing my point, however i get yours. Infact lets now take gender and/or race off the table. What's left is What I am talking about. Issues dealing with social/ecconomic class, education, are the primary desciding factors in how our soceity works. These are often times non-elected attributes that are assigned at birth. few if any break these chains. (Speaking on a world wide scale not some mothers cousin you maybe thinking of)

So my question is, if it is ok to segergate the populace using the standards of education and social ecconomic class (something one is generally born into) then why is it then not ok to make these divisions anywhere else it may benfit soceity?

[Mudhammam]

Nothing if you can demonstrate said authority in which you made your decree.

Otherwise, you are looking for control over another not entitled to you.

Which is the point of the entire thread. People, including NT writers, appealed to creation to justify patriarchy, as has always been the case. Thanks to science and secularism, we now understand such appeals to be utterly lacking justification in any sense of physiology and basic logic.

Which again all of our collective soceities have this control over us, now. What is the difference if the control is based on gender or if it is based on the money you make? It is that exact same level of control.

Youre fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

The only fool is the person defending the suppression of basic human rights (as they are needs), such as the liberty and opportunity to learn or teach, to speak, to authorize one's own actions, on the basis of gender or class. Obviously, whether or not you believe money ought to be equivalent to speech or basic freedoms to act as others are allowed to do in private and public spheres is not exactly the same as a conversion about privileges bestowed on account of a person's genitalia.

[The Valkyrie]

"Does the New Testament contain sexism? "

Is this a trick question?

[FatAndFaithless]

So my question is, if it is ok to segergate the populace using the standards of education and social ecconomic class (something one is generally born into) then why is it then not ok to make these divisions anywhere else it may benfit soceity?

Because, as we've established, gender and race and sexualtiy don't have any impact on the ability of someone to fulfill a role.

[genkaus]

If one can not learn in the ways the schools have taught forever, then literally that person is without an education. Therfore a learning disablity prevents one from being educated in the way we teach our children. Most people can not afford to send their kids to the few schools who specialize in teaching kids with learning disablities.

They could be educated at home with the parents learning about those special methods. Really, just because you weren't educated properly doesn't mean it is impossible for everyone with a learning disability.

that's crap. Do you want a 'doctor' with a learning disablity to do your open heart surgery, or do you want someone who graduated at the top of his class?

Its not discrimination to want the best person for the job. And if the guy with the learning disability turned out to be prodigy at open heart surgery, then I'd definitely want him.

It seems you think that soceity only divides us in areas where we have control. it doesn't. My last post demonstrates this. So my question is if we are willing to be divided in soceity where one is born one way or another, then what is the big deal here?

I never said society didn't divide us where we don't have control - that would imply that discrimination doesn't exist and it does. My statement is about what society should do and your post falls flat in that regard.

---

Well, that's not true. i choose to be a movie star, then a rock star, then I chose to be a pilot...
None of these things happened for me. However soceity would allow me to mop floors and clean up after mechanics.

And what actions did you take to enact those choices.

That's not true at all. Would you let someone with diminished mental capasities fly a passenger jet? why not? Why is your judgement here any more valid that a call to judgement base on the inherent properties of gender?

If the guy could properly fly a jet then sure, I would. And that is why judgement is more valid - it is based on ability and not on imagined "inherent properties of gender".

Your missing my point, however i get yours. Infact lets now take gender and/or race off the table. What's left is What I am talking about. Issues dealing with social/ecconomic class, education, are the primary desciding factors in how our soceity works. These are often times non-elected attributes that are assigned at birth. few if any break these chains. (Speaking on a world wide scale not some mothers cousin you maybe thinking of)

So my question is, if it is ok to segergate the populace using the standards of education and social ecconomic class (something one is generally born into) then why is it then not ok to make these divisions anywhere else it may benfit soceity?

Those are non-elected attributes at birth, but they can and are frequently changeable. Secondly, one of the goals of the society is to remove those variations - so clearly, they are not okay with that unequal opportunity presented.

Then there is the fact that the segregation here is the result of what you are capable of - not what you are. And that segregation is quite acceptable.

[HopOnPop]

....ah, the fine art of baiting atheists by feigning an obtuse ability for comprehension. Thanks Drich, but I think Ray Comfort does it MUCH better than you.

[Zidneya]

Have you ever heard the word FREEDOM?

If we live in any type of soceity, none of us are truly free. We all have roles to play with in said soceity. So what is the difference here?

What would you do if you were forced to work as a police officer?

I would be a cop.

Yeah sure after all it wouldn't be so bad becoming a cop right? But what if society demands to to be a guinea pig for pharmaceutical studies, or a radioactive waste recolector and disposer, or a septic tank repairman, or a proctologist, or a rodeo clown, or a car crash testing subject. Then I want to see if you show the same enthusiasm and let's see if you still think like that.