Church tells man-hungry women to lower standards

[celticfan1888]

I'd like to first reject this ridiculous notion that certain men do not look for a woman who is career oriented or has ambition. For me I believe the housewife is the most important job a woman can have and is not even close to adequatley "compensated" nor respected enough. However I do predict in the future women will be replacing the role of men as the breadwinner. It's already trending that more women than men are going to college and graduating. And I am sure we will see plenty more women prevelant in positions which traditionally men have always had.

I do not call a person who says to his wife, "honey, please do your part to bring home the bacon" to be a man.

And I call you intolerant of not letting women be equal. If she wants to work, let her work. Lord Sauron...you really live up to your name.

*sigh* Can we please have another Ecumenical Council to condemn egalitarianism? It's getting out of control.

I'm not saying she can't be a housewife. But if she doesn't want to be, she shouldn't be forced to. Some women get bored to death sitting at home all day.

You don't believe women are equal?

I don't believe women are equal to men.
I don't believe women are equal to other women.
I don't believe men are equal to other men.
I don't believe there's any reasonable metric that will return the result "all people are equal."
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any two people who are equal by any reasonable metric.
I don't believe an egalitarian structure for the family accords with Scripture, nature, or Orthodox Tradition.

If no one is equal, then are you implying that every person has a superior and inferior all the way up and down the scale? So do you want me to start plowing your fields now or later...considering I am not your equal?

[vamrat]

I'd like to first reject this ridiculous notion that certain men do not look for a woman who is career oriented or has ambition. For me I believe the housewife is the most important job a woman can have and is not even close to adequatley "compensated" nor respected enough. However I do predict in the future women will be replacing the role of men as the breadwinner. It's already trending that more women than men are going to college and graduating. And I am sure we will see plenty more women prevelant in positions which traditionally men have always had.

I do not call a person who says to his wife, "honey, please do your part to bring home the bacon" to be a man.

And I call you intolerant of not letting women be equal. If she wants to work, let her work. Lord Sauron...you really live up to your name.

*sigh* Can we please have another Ecumenical Council to condemn egalitarianism? It's getting out of control.

I'm not saying she can't be a housewife. But if she doesn't want to be, she shouldn't be forced to. Some women get bored to death sitting at home all day.

You don't believe women are equal?

I don't believe women are equal to men.
I don't believe women are equal to other women.
I don't believe men are equal to other men.
I don't believe there's any reasonable metric that will return the result "all people are equal."
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any two people who are equal by any reasonable metric.
I don't believe an egalitarian structure for the family accords with Scripture, nature, or Orthodox Tradition.

If no one is equal, then are you implying that every person has a superior and inferior all the way up and down the scale? So do you want me to start plowing your fields now or later...considering I am not your equal?

When you get famous in Munich I intend on buying a shirt with your name on it.  The likelihood of you ever returning the favour is slim to nil. 

Different people have different talents.  God gives some five and some two and some only one.  What we do with them makes us who we are.  Of the one guy had put it to work and the two guy had wasted it's potential and the five guy had blown it all on crack, we'd have a totally different outcome in the story.  But regardless, the master gave a different number of talents to each servant at the outset.

[OrthoNoob]

I'd like to first reject this ridiculous notion that certain men do not look for a woman who is career oriented or has ambition. For me I believe the housewife is the most important job a woman can have and is not even close to adequatley "compensated" nor respected enough. However I do predict in the future women will be replacing the role of men as the breadwinner. It's already trending that more women than men are going to college and graduating. And I am sure we will see plenty more women prevelant in positions which traditionally men have always had.

I do not call a person who says to his wife, "honey, please do your part to bring home the bacon" to be a man.

And I call you intolerant of not letting women be equal. If she wants to work, let her work. Lord Sauron...you really live up to your name.

*sigh* Can we please have another Ecumenical Council to condemn egalitarianism? It's getting out of control.

I'm not saying she can't be a housewife. But if she doesn't want to be, she shouldn't be forced to. Some women get bored to death sitting at home all day.

You don't believe women are equal?

I don't believe women are equal to men.
I don't believe women are equal to other women.
I don't believe men are equal to other men.
I don't believe there's any reasonable metric that will return the result "all people are equal."
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any two people who are equal by any reasonable metric.
I don't believe an egalitarian structure for the family accords with Scripture, nature, or Orthodox Tradition.

If no one is equal, then are you implying that every person has a superior and inferior all the way up and down the scale? So do you want me to start plowing your fields now or later...considering I am not your equal?

How can I answer such an absurd question, except to turn the absurdity back to whence it came and say "now, if you please"?

You and I are not equal. I do not know which of us is superior (and the answer would of course depend on what metric you use; for example (and I'm just making this up) I might be a better writer while you blow me away at music), but your right to refuse to plow my fields does not imply that we are equal.

[NicholasMyra]

This thread is Sodom and Gomorrah, accursed unto the last day.

[vamrat]

This thread is Sodom and Gomorrah, accursed unto the last day.

No sodomy here.

[biro]

What is Gomorrah-ing, anyway?

[OrthoNoob]

What is Gomorrah-ing, anyway?

These are the public forums. 

[dzheremi]

What is Gomorrah-ing, anyway?

I guess if you're going to post in this thread, you'll want to put one of those paper toilet seat covers over your computer first...

[biro]

What is Gomorrah-ing, anyway?

I guess if you're going to post in this thread, you'll want to put one of those paper toilet seat covers over your computer first...

Thanks.

[vamrat]

What is Gomorrah-ing, anyway?

You don't want to know.

But in case you do...

The Aristocrats.

[OrthoNoob]

This thread is Sodom and Gomorrah, accursed unto the last day.

No sodomy here.

According to some posters on this site, what you just said means "we all give plenty of money to the poor." 

[celticfan1888]

When you get famous in Munich I intend on buying a shirt with your name on it.  The likelihood of you ever returning the favour is slim to nil. 

Different people have different talents.  God gives some five and some two and some only one.  What we do with them makes us who we are.  Of the one guy had put it to work and the two guy had wasted it's potential and the five guy had blown it all on crack, we'd have a totally different outcome in the story.  But regardless, the master gave a different number of talents to each servant at the outset.

And I'm pretty sure you have some kick butt abilities I do not. That is what makes people equal. IMHO.

Even if you waste your potential, you still have it.

[celticfan1888]

How can I answer such an absurd question, except to turn the absurdity back to whence it came and say "now, if you please"?

You and I are not equal. I do not know which of us is superior (and the answer would of course depend on what metric you use; for example (and I'm just making this up) I might be a better writer while you blow me away at music), but your right to refuse to plow my fields does not imply that we are equal.

I do not see my question as absurd. The lesser should serve the greater, should henot?

If we both are good at things, despite them being different, how are we NOT equal? We are equal in different ways other than your narrow view of equality.

Many of the things I am good at (soccer-football for example, that is my profession), I don't think I was born good at. Maybe my strong build and physique gave me an advantage, but I had to work just as hard as anyone else. Anyone here could be doing what I do if they worked hard.

What if there is a woman who is bigger, stronger, better decisions, more emotionally stable than you, is she more suited to lead the household then? Under your argument?

[vamrat]

When you get famous in Munich I intend on buying a shirt with your name on it.  The likelihood of you ever returning the favour is slim to nil. 

Different people have different talents.  God gives some five and some two and some only one.  What we do with them makes us who we are.  Of the one guy had put it to work and the two guy had wasted it's potential and the five guy had blown it all on crack, we'd have a totally different outcome in the story.  But regardless, the master gave a different number of talents to each servant at the outset.

And I'm pretty sure you have some kick butt abilities I do not. That is what makes people equal. IMHO.

Even if you waste your potential, you still have it.

I think we are operating on different definitions of equal.  To me it means that all things come out balanced.  I think you are looking at this as 5+2 = 3+4.  This is correct.  Both ends come out equal even though the composite parts are different.  But there are instances in life where you have 5+2 and people want it to equal 1+5.  5+2 =/= 1+4.  There are people out there who are head and shoulders above their competition.  In the Stone Age these 5+2 people would survive and then breed whereas the 1+4 people would either die or at least be passed over when it came time to breed.  Civilization has made it so that even inferiors can survive and even breed, sometime even superior people are passed over due to culturally ingrained traits that would have been disadvantages in the previous eras. 

Regardless, there are superiors and there are inferiors.  Some people will be of equivalent talents, some people might even be complete equals (5+2 = 5+2).  But none of this is guaranteed.  This can also change over time.  I can say hands down that in strength and intelligence I will beat 100% of infants.  Likewise, I will beat most 60 year olds in strength, not all, but most, whereas a significant proportion of them will have more experiences and learned wisdom than I have (I say "most" because there are mental deficients out there).

[OrthoNoob]

How can I answer such an absurd question, except to turn the absurdity back to whence it came and say "now, if you please"?

You and I are not equal. I do not know which of us is superior (and the answer would of course depend on what metric you use; for example (and I'm just making this up) I might be a better writer while you blow me away at music), but your right to refuse to plow my fields does not imply that we are equal.

I do not see my question as absurd. The lesser should serve the greater, should henot?

Yes, of course he should. What was I thinking? That is why, after all, "the Son of Man came not to serve, but to be served."

If we both are good at things, despite them being different, how are we NOT equal? We are equal in different ways other than your narrow view of equality.

What do you think my "narrow view" is? I have an incredibly broad view, actually. Produce one (1) reasonable metric that returns the result "all people are equal." Go ahead. I'll wait.

Many of the things I am good at (soccer-football for example, that is my profession), I don't think I was born good at. Maybe my strong build and physique gave me an advantage, but I had to work just as hard as anyone else. Anyone here could be doing what I do if they worked hard.

No, he couldn't. Not everyone has the capacity to be a great soccer player. Of course you had to work hard to get where you are. It doesn't follow from that that natural talent doesn't exist or that lack of it doesn't limit people's potential.

What if there is a woman who is bigger, stronger, better decisions, more emotionally stable than you, is she more suited to lead the household then? Under your argument?

I haven't yet argued that husbands/fathers should lead their households. If and when I get around to that, it will not be based on any kind of claim that there is no woman who makes better decisions than I or is more emotionally stable or anything like that. Moreover, this is a non-issue, as such a woman would almost certainly not be attracted to me, nor I to her, and thus we would not marry and the question of who should run our mutual household affairs would be rather moot.

[biro]

How's this for a metric?



And this?

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Excerpt of the first line of the second paragraph:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

There you go, two of them. So, you lose. 

[vamrat]

How's this for a metric?



And this?

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Excerpt of the first line of the second paragraph:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

There you go, two of them. So, you lose. 

Indeed.  All MEN are created equal.  Not women.  Nor blacks or Native Americans since they really weren't humans.  Catholic bogtrotters were questionable as well. 

Shall I go on about how your second statement is pretty falacious?


And honestly, if you believe that we are equal under the law, I suggest you try selling some dope.  I'll bet you'll get in a lot more trouble than if you just stole old people's retirement funds...

[OrthoNoob]

How's this for a metric?

That's not a metric. That's an inscription.

And this?

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Excerpt of the first line of the second paragraph:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

That's not a metric. That's an assertion.

There you go, two of them. So, you lose. 

No, I don't lose. Go look up "metric" and try again.

[celticfan1888]

How can I answer such an absurd question, except to turn the absurdity back to whence it came and say "now, if you please"?

You and I are not equal. I do not know which of us is superior (and the answer would of course depend on what metric you use; for example (and I'm just making this up) I might be a better writer while you blow me away at music), but your right to refuse to plow my fields does not imply that we are equal.

I do not see my question as absurd. The lesser should serve the greater, should henot?

Yes, of course he should. What was I thinking? That is why, after all, "the Son of Man came not to serve, but to be served."

If we both are good at things, despite them being different, how are we NOT equal? We are equal in different ways other than your narrow view of equality.

What do you think my "narrow view" is? I have an incredibly broad view, actually. Produce one (1) reasonable metric that returns the result "all people are equal." Go ahead. I'll wait.

Many of the things I am good at (soccer-football for example, that is my profession), I don't think I was born good at. Maybe my strong build and physique gave me an advantage, but I had to work just as hard as anyone else. Anyone here could be doing what I do if they worked hard.

No, he couldn't. Not everyone has the capacity to be a great soccer player. Of course you had to work hard to get where you are. It doesn't follow from that that natural talent doesn't exist or that lack of it doesn't limit people's potential.

What if there is a woman who is bigger, stronger, better decisions, more emotionally stable than you, is she more suited to lead the household then? Under your argument?

I haven't yet argued that husbands/fathers should lead their households. If and when I get around to that, it will not be based on any kind of claim that there is no woman who makes better decisions than I or is more emotionally stable or anything like that. Moreover, this is a non-issue, as such a woman would almost certainly not be attracted to me, nor I to her, and thus we would not marry and the question of who should run our mutual household affairs would be rather moot.

I think I see your point. I just interpreted what you said the wrong way.

[OrthoNoob]

How can I answer such an absurd question, except to turn the absurdity back to whence it came and say "now, if you please"?

You and I are not equal. I do not know which of us is superior (and the answer would of course depend on what metric you use; for example (and I'm just making this up) I might be a better writer while you blow me away at music), but your right to refuse to plow my fields does not imply that we are equal.

I do not see my question as absurd. The lesser should serve the greater, should henot?

Yes, of course he should. What was I thinking? That is why, after all, "the Son of Man came not to serve, but to be served."

If we both are good at things, despite them being different, how are we NOT equal? We are equal in different ways other than your narrow view of equality.

What do you think my "narrow view" is? I have an incredibly broad view, actually. Produce one (1) reasonable metric that returns the result "all people are equal." Go ahead. I'll wait.

Many of the things I am good at (soccer-football for example, that is my profession), I don't think I was born good at. Maybe my strong build and physique gave me an advantage, but I had to work just as hard as anyone else. Anyone here could be doing what I do if they worked hard.

No, he couldn't. Not everyone has the capacity to be a great soccer player. Of course you had to work hard to get where you are. It doesn't follow from that that natural talent doesn't exist or that lack of it doesn't limit people's potential.

What if there is a woman who is bigger, stronger, better decisions, more emotionally stable than you, is she more suited to lead the household then? Under your argument?

I haven't yet argued that husbands/fathers should lead their households. If and when I get around to that, it will not be based on any kind of claim that there is no woman who makes better decisions than I or is more emotionally stable or anything like that. Moreover, this is a non-issue, as such a woman would almost certainly not be attracted to me, nor I to her, and thus we would not marry and the question of who should run our mutual household affairs would be rather moot.

I think I see your point. I just interpreted what you said the wrong way.

I think you've got it right.

[vamrat]

I think he's right and wrong at the same time for different reasons... 

[celticfan1888]

I think he's right and wrong at the same time for different reasons... 

But you love me for it, admit it!

[vamrat]

I think he's right and wrong at the same time for different reasons... 

But you love me for it, admit it!

 

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Non-Religious Topics (Moderator: Pravoslavbob) > Topic: Church tells man-hungry women to lower standards