Porn - Degrading to women?

[MPDC]

Originally Posted by femme_fatale!

Sin arises only if the person believes in something like god(s), morality, etc. Without believing such, there is no 'sin'.

However there still can be a right and wrong.
There always has been. One just must admit that it is perspective based.

[femme_fatale!]

Yes, there still can be right and wrong. Oftentimes however, what is wrong is considered a sin or is associated to sin. It is all really perspective based.

[MPDC]

Originally Posted by femme_fatale!

Yes, there still can be right and wrong. Oftentimes however, what is wrong is considered a sin or is associated to sin. It is all really perspective based.

That was the herd.
They called it a sin, so as to give it a reason for it being wrong. God didn’t want you to do it...
If you read Plato he really says it well. 3 rules for society to exist.
1-There must be a god. Or gods
2-he or they are interested in day to day ops
3-they or he can not be swayed by prayer or sacrifice.
He explains this as in, if there is no god, why fear right and wrong? If there is one but he is disinterested then again why care? If he is interested but can be swayed by prayer or sacrifice it again means why care because you can bribe him.

[MacNeal]

Todd,

Well it was an excellent point.

Sad to hear about Feltis. I hope he pulls through. We will send a card and flowers for sure. Thanks for the info.

[MPDC]

Originally Posted by MacNeal

Todd,

Well it was an excellent point.

Sad to hear about Feltis. I hope he pulls through. We will send a card and flowers for sure. Thanks for the info.

Aye
yeah thanks for the nod.
(He asked for no flowers, before we was put into a comma.) made him feel like he was already dead.)
a card would be nice.
And get some of your partners to sign one too. he has a daughter. make sure she knows her father has a very LARGE family in blue.

[Dragon]

Who is this? I missed something somewhere. Not that it is not important to say some one was special, but who is this Feltis? I know he is an officer but what happened...or am i just plain oblivious today or the last few days? wow.

[MPDC]

Originally Posted by Dragon

Who is this? I missed something somewhere. Not that it is not important to say some one was special, but who is this Feltis? I know he is an officer but what happened...or am i just plain oblivious today or the last few days? wow.

Bad guy running from Arlington Police ran over an old partner of Neal’s and mine. HE may just well have killed him. We won’t know for a little while.
The officer has already lost his leg, and is in a doctor induced comma. He has a wife and a daughter (7 years old). They are Christian and asked for prayers.
The bad guy shot himself in the leg and resisted arrest after the vehicle was finally stopped. HE however is already out of intensive care. And, is facing a number of federal and state (commonwealth) charges.
Manslaughter may be one before to long.

[Dragon]

Ok. i understand. and i hope him the best of luck to survive or i wish luck for the family on recovering.

[MPDC]

Originally Posted by Dragon

Ok. i understand. and i hope him the best of luck to survive or i wish luck for the family on recovering.

I thank you. I am sure his family thanks you.

[Pitchforkpat]

Originally Posted by Fallen

I find it funny. I always seem to have some sort of problem (something that just makes me uncomfortable) with your posts pat, and this one was no exception.

Well, given my name, I’d think something was wrong if you didn’t have a problem with my posts. If they make you feel uncomfortable, I’ll take that as a compliment …ok enough with the pleasantries…

Originally Posted by Fallen

Firstly, "remember, Paul said that women shouldn’t be allowed to speak in church" because they were living in a culture within which women were uneducated and had low standing.

So if a prophet living in Taliban-led Afghanistan said women shouldn’t speak in Mosques you would make excuses for him? Any man with intelligence, wisdom, and vision should be championing the cause of women, and women’s education throughout the world, not perpetuating the problem. Paul was no visionary. He was a misogynist who thought women to be intellectually incapable compared with men.

Originally Posted by Fallen

And, as for the ten concubines of David, it says no where that it was right (or good) the actions that Absalom made.

I reckon, pat, that you should make sure that you remember cultural context in any accusations you make about the Books of the Bible.

Aaaaah…but the cultural context is precisely the point and where your error is most abundantly clear. You try to excuse the Bible by saying that it doesn’t state whether Absalom’s rape of the 10 concubines was right or wrong. On the contrary, it HAD to be right because it was God made the whole thing happen, and by definition, everything God does is right and good. So it was right and good that Absalom raped those poor women. Now THAT is degrading to women, to be raped just in order to show Israel that Absalom had taken the palace. The real cultural context is that the writers of the Bible thought that women were of less value than men and this is reflected in the attitudes of their made up god.

I suppose you would use cultural context to try to excuse God saying that a “master” may go unpunished for beating his “slave” almost to death. Cultural context was also used to excuse slavery in the southern US at one time. I can take it you would have been happy to defend the slave owners with the same logic.



[quote=Fallen] And, "misogynistic"? The Bible states that all men and women are created equal. [quote]
Where??


Furthermore, I see you make no comment on the part about the master pushing his concubine out the door to be raped and abused all night (eventually dying) by the men of the town just to save his own hide and how the Bible does not even suggest that the man’s actions were wrong. And you state to me that the Bible treats men and women equally…hmm….more beautiful examples of the closed cult mind at work.

I’ll assume this post also makes you uncomfortable.

[Fallen]

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

So if a prophet living in Taliban-led Afghanistan said women shouldn’t speak in Mosques you would make excuses for him? Any man with intelligence, wisdom, and vision should be championing the cause of women, and women’s education throughout the world, not perpetuating the problem. Paul was no visionary. He was a misogynist who thought women to be intellectually incapable compared with men.

pat, you have said that Paul was a misogynist. Again, I repeat my previous statements - there are many occasions where Paul uses examples of women as his contemporaries in faith and devotion. He was not characterised by his hatred of women - as that is what misogynistic means.

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

Aaaaah…but the cultural context is precisely the point and where your error is most abundantly clear. You try to excuse the Bible by saying that it doesn’t state whether Absalom’s rape of the 10 concubines was right or wrong. On the contrary, it HAD to be right because it was God made the whole thing happen, and by definition, everything God does is right and good. So it was right and good that Absalom raped those poor women. Now THAT is degrading to women, to be raped just in order to show Israel that Absalom had taken the palace. The real cultural context is that the writers of the Bible thought that women were of less value than men and this is reflected in the attitudes of their made up god.

Again, emotive language in use...

It says he "lay" with them, whether or not it was rape is known as eisogesis - I'm sure you've heard the term - but I will not excuse Absalom's actions; they were wrong.

So, then what do you think about the Koran's blatant reference to women as being subordinate to men and that "men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is Great." (Women 4:34) Hmmm?

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

I suppose you would use cultural context to try to excuse God saying that a “master” may go unpunished for beating his “slave” almost to death. Cultural context was also used to excuse slavery in the southern US at one time. I can take it you would have been happy to defend the slave owners with the same logic.

I am not defending their actions, but I must again stress that you are not taking into account the culture within which these letters were written (to the churches of the New Testament). And, you can take out of what I say whatever you want; doesn't make you right.

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

Where??

Where? 1 Corintians 11:11-12 "In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God." Also, in Genesis, the creation of Eve as a "helper" to man is not a subordinate role; it was "not good" for man to be alone. She was created as the partner of Adam; not as the slave of him.

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

Furthermore, I see you make no comment on the part about the master pushing his concubine out the door to be raped and abused all night (eventually dying) by the men of the town just to save his own hide and how the Bible does not even suggest that the man’s actions were wrong. And you state to me that the Bible treats men and women equally…hmm….more beautiful examples of the closed cult mind at work.

Good to see you noticed. I did not have the time then; or now.

Originally Posted by Pitchforkpat

I’ll assume this post also makes you uncomfortable.

Very astute of you! I find your "cult mind" to be even more "beautiful".

[Dragon]

"I am not defending their actions, but I must again stress that you are not taking into account the culture within which these letters were written."


Then why follow something that is old and out of date? Most cultures and civilizations move on not stay with the same belief or cultural structures...so i believe the theists need to move on.

[kyman]

Where? 1 Corintians 11:11-12 "In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God."

I think what confuses people with these passages is that they aren't referring to energies which man and woman represent. Man is representative of an energy, and female is its counter part. That is what we are. That is where we came from. What happens in the bible is man's identity takes this reality and interprets it biasly. Women in the mind of man, become labels which support the male idenitity. The bible clearly says that without one, you cannot have the other, but the reason why this truth isn't reflected in that culture is because of man's idenitity. The identity is blind to its own reality. Man's identity can only exist in the context of male/female forces. It exists, but does not acknowledge its unity with the female.

My guess is that paul's grasp of universal truth/law/process did not reflect entirely in his actions regarding women. If he would betray his own friend would he break tradition in the eye's of his fellow male identities for the sake of a woman.

[Dragon]

Very nicely put kyman.

[kyman]

I agree, Dragon. That is why many spiritual leaders ask that organizations not be set up around them. It is because people do not realize that an organization is a living entity. Upon coming together it will then attempt to stay alive or together by taking in new minds and uploading its collective belief system into them. The organization becomes a personality that is either handed down, or in many cases forced upon people. It is because the entity is driven by human idenitity. Every idenitity is subject to change, and so resists it in attempt to prolong its sense of self. It ends up cementing people into a system that cannot grow, at least without suffering loss of ego or sense of self, which is basically 'death' of ego.

This will always be a problem until idenitity and its downfalls become common knowledge. And even then it doesn't mean a person will have any control. Basically identity is a course. A generated identity is kin to an established course. The identity must runs its course. There is no way to avoid death of identity because of the law of impermenance. The key is to create an idenitity based off of change itself, which is to say, have no idenitity. You can have a relative sense of self, which can comfortably change. But you cannot have an absolute identity that is comfortable with change, unless that identity is derived on change itself. I'm speaking of the "go with the flow" idenitity.

If eternity/emptiness/nothingness is your identity, then there is nothing in you to resist the moment and what it offers. There will be nothing in you dependent on outcome, and so bent on power trips for the sake of controlling outcome. The moment IS your identity, as opposed to your idenitity using the moment as a means to some end, which is always an attempt to protect that identity.