Author Topic: A cult?  (Read 39317 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #345 on: May 25, 2005, 10:43:00 PM »
//So why follow a religion that still follows that principle that women are a) not equal to men, and b) that man was made first, therefore men are more important to the bible. All women are to them is a biproduct of a man. //

OK - where do you get the idea this is what Christianity is about? Granted - you might have some sect you can point to - but the faith over all? No mamme. This is another one of your mis-conceptions.

//Many Christians say this earth was made for us to use and therefore it is ok for us to mistret it if we choose to. I just dont agree with that.//

I can't agree with this either. Many *people* don't give a rattz azz about the environment - it has nothing to do with their faith - they are just selfish and or ignorant - weather or not they are Christian.
From my Christian perspective, The Earth is God's creation; and we are to treasure and protect it and appreciate the wonder of it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #346 on: May 26, 2005, 12:17:00 PM »
The thing is, most women who are "degraded and objectified," in common parlance, are not women who have been physically attacked and forced into it.

They're women who have *chosen* to enter beauty pageants, or wear a bikini to the beach or pool or water park, or take a part in a commercial, or a music video, or a TV show or movie.

They're women who have made *choices* based on what *they* want and don't see themselves as "degraded and objectified" at all.

If you don't want to be ogled, move to a Hasidic community and dress like the locals.  You guaranteed won't be.

Come to think of it, I haven't had a whole lot of problems with that myself after passing, oh, about 35.

Not that *I* saw it as a problem, mind you. :smile:

It looks very much to me that you're complaining that *other* women have choices to do things you don't like.

In what ways are you forced to be a "degraded" sex object?

(Which is what I presume you mean.)

If you are, you must look a heck of a lot better than me.  I just look like a frumpy middle-aged housewife, myself.  A bit past the wolf-whistle age.

I never hear about women being "objectified and degraded" by being set to work scrubbing floors or toilets, for example.  Or being consigned to work in daycares as "mother-objects."

Timoclea
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #347 on: May 26, 2005, 12:26:00 PM »
(I love kids.  I was just trying to come up with potential alternative forms of "objectification and degradation" to either forstall the "no, I wasn't talking about sex" OR the "Well, see, you knew what I was talking about, so on some level you must know it's true."  Are men objectified and degraded by recruiting posters that show them in uniform?  Or gritty shots from the war zone?  Do we make them into "violence objects"?  Ever heard a poet talked about as some sort of "poetry object"?  Maybe the conversation wouldn't have "gone there"---but I was making a point.)

T.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline `

  • Posts: 556
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #348 on: May 26, 2005, 12:44:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-05-25 19:32:00, BuzzKill wrote:

"Well I don't like the idea of being traded for cow either. But back then - having ones father offered something as vital and valuable as a cow for your hand was an indication of your great value..."


yeah, your value was approximately that of the cows for which you were traded.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #349 on: May 26, 2005, 02:03:00 PM »
***I can't agree with this either. Many *people* don't give a rattz azz about the environment - it has nothing to do with their faith - they are just selfish and or ignorant - weather or not they are Christian.
From my Christian perspective, The Earth is God's creation; and we are to treasure and protect it and appreciate the wonder of it.***

The most political, out-spoken ?Christians? absolutely are not in favor of protecting Earth.

http://www.alternet.org/story/15814
Why Ecocide Is 'Good News' for the GOP

Excerpts:
The federal government -- with Republicans in control of the White House, Congress and the judiciary -- has launched the largest rollback of environmental laws and regulations ever. The Bush administration seems determined to undo much of the good done since Earth Day 1970, when 20 million Americans defended the planet in the biggest mass demonstration of U.S. history.

Nevertheless, beyond all these more obvious anti-environmental motivations there lies a more deep-seated inspiration. Difficult as it may be to believe, many of the conservatives who have great influence in the Bush administration and now in Congress are governed by a Higher Power.

In his book "The Carbon Wars," Greenpeace activist Jeremy Leggett tells how he stumbled upon this otherworldly agenda. During the Kyoto climate change negotiations, Leggett candidly asked Ford Motor Company executive John Schiller how opponents of the pact could believe there is no problem with "a world of a billion cars intent on burning all the oil and gas available on the planet?" The executive asserted first that scientists get it wrong when they say fossil fuels have been sequestered underground for eons.

The Earth, he said, is just 10,000, not 4.5 billion years old, the age widely accepted by scientists.

Then Schiller confidently declared, "You know, the more I look, the more it is just as it says in the Bible." The Book of Daniel, he told Leggett, predicts that increased earthly devastation will mark the "End Time" and return of Christ. Paradoxically, Leggett notes, many fundamentalists see dying coral reefs, melting ice caps and other environmental destruction not as an urgent call to action, but as God's will. In the religious right worldview, the wreck of the Earth can be seen as Good News!

Some true believers, interpreting biblical prophecy, are sure they will be saved from the horrific destruction brought by ecosystem collapse. They'll be raptured: rescued from Earth by God, who will then rain down seven ghastly years of misery on unbelieving humanity. Jesus' return will mark the Millennium, when the Lord restores the Earth to its green pristine condition, and the faithful enjoy a thousand years of peace and prosperity.

The Republican Party platform in Bush's home state warns of what to expect from a federal government guided by religious right radicalism. The Texas platform "reaffirms the United States of America as a Christian Nation," and seeks to nullify the separation between church and state. It would abolish the EPA, and the Departments of Energy and Education. It dismisses global warming as "myth." And it promotes public school education "based upon Biblical principles," not upon secular humanism, which teaches Darwinian evolutionary theory and a scientific worldview.

Texans have paid the price for their leaders' anti-environmental stance. During George W. Bush's time as governor, the state gained the honor of having the dirtiest air in America. It also ranks 47th in water quality, and has the seventh-highest rate of release of toxic industrial byproducts.

The anti-science movement has also extended itself into the classroom. Last fall, the Texas Board of Education rejected several environmental science textbooks, including one entitled "Environmental Science: Creating a Sustainable Environment." Critics forced the book ban primarily on ideological grounds, calling the text "vitriol against Western civilization and its primary belief systems." Another science book was approved only after the publisher agreed to remove entire sections on climate change.

Should efforts to de-emphasize the teaching of evolutionary theory actually succeed, one wonders how we could hope to confront tough environmental problems. How, for instance, could we train scientists to fight the virulent new strains of bacteria that have evolved resistance to potent antibiotics? Or, another example: In his book "The Beak of the Finch," science journalist Jonathan Weiner tells how the U.S. cotton industry is threatened with collapse because of Heliothis virescens, a moth that has evolved total resistance to all pesticides.

Frustrated entomologist Martin Taylor notes the irony of the equivalence between the Southern Cotton Belt and Bible Belt. "It's amazing," Taylor notes, "that cotton growers are having to deal with these pests in the very states whose legislatures are so hostile to the theory of evolution. Because it is evolution itself they are struggling against in their fields every season. These people are trying to ban the teaching of evolution while their own cotton crops are failing because of evolution. How can you be a creationist farmer anymore?"

For those who think the teaching of environmental science is safe in our schools, or that evolution vs. creationism is a dead issue, listen to this comment from Tom DeLay, one of the most powerful men in Congress. He suggested that the Columbine, Colorado school shootings occurred "because our school systems teach our children that they are nothing but glorified apes who have evolutionized out of some primordial mud."

DeLay agrees with Ford executive Schiller that, despite the fossil evidence, the Earth is only thousands of years old. Such willful ignorance of science informs the religious right approach to the environment, and the embattled Earth will bear the consequences.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #350 on: May 26, 2005, 02:11:00 PM »
Organized religion really shows the arrogance of human kind in general. Why are we any different than any of the other millions of species of living things on Earth, or anywhere in the universe for that matter? Yes, we have developed an ability to interpret things around us, and develop skills to even manipulate our surroundings, but that is it. Religion is laughable, a fantasy implanted in the head of a naive young child.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #351 on: May 26, 2005, 03:57:00 PM »
Buzz,
Ok first off eve came from adams rib or so they say right? so man came first according to the bible.

And like i said, there are no apostles that the bible says are apostles that are women. And jesus was a man. And god is considered a "man". And you even admitted that no man woud have followed a woman jesus. So yeah, I take that as men are more important and more trusted.

Well look at the fucking "Christian" president. He could fucking care less about the environemt. And like deb pointed out, many prominent christians could care less too. But like i said, Wiccans are loving to the earth. Tim can probably testify to that. I like that about that religion.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #352 on: May 26, 2005, 04:06:00 PM »
no no no tim. I agree. Women can choose to objectify themselves if they want. However I am saying women in the biblical times were treated lame and alot of that is carried into our time now becasue it is in the bible. And come on. Society believes women should all be beautiful long haired shaved legged no flaw skinny as hell sex kittens. You cant deny that. If oyu have any flaw, you are considered irrelevent or not attractive. And alot of women dont feel objectified because they probably get off on the attention and power they get from beign that way. I dotn like it, but I cant stop them. But yes, I do believe society in general places these expectations on women that cant be met by all of us and we shouldt have to meet them. And there are those who consider the role of women as the homemaking mothers to be outdated and sexist. Personally I think the responsibility of upkeep on the house is both partners.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #353 on: May 26, 2005, 04:19:00 PM »
Timocela - you misunderstand the point I was trying to make if you think I was complainging. Not so. I was just trying to point out that women in Biblical times were very much valued and not typically degraded. I think that kind of thing is more common today. But this isn't a complaint - just stating an opinion. I can't say For Sure that women in Biblical times seldome if ever felt degraded - but I doubt it. We may not approve of the society they lived in, but  I'd argue that for them - then - it was very acceptable and they felt secure in their value to family and community. But, this doesn't mean I want to change places with them.

As for the choice factor - with the examples you give, I'd tend to agree - but people can feel pressured into some of these choices; and some of them are made as a result of degrading life experaince.

As for the objectification you allude to  (not being bother with for awhile) Very few women do object to this kind of "admiration". Or men either, I suspect. Personally, I never minded a compliment, or a wink and a smile; But I have always minded very much being groped by some stranger or having some crude remaked directed at me. So, this is really a matter of degree, isn't it?

The anon talking about the value of a cow -
Well, they are valuable even now - but then? A cow was life itself. Cows and goats and sheep were very valuable indeed, back in the time we are talking about.

Deb - I would have an argument or two for the Ford exec if we were to have the chance to talk. IF that is what he said (and to be fair, he may well have been misquoted)  then he is wrong. Futhermore, there are a lot of Christians who have doubts about George dubya's "belife system".  His father was without doubt a real New Age man - He spoke openly about ushering in the New World Order.  Dubya also seems to lean in this direction; and both father and son are members of Skull & Bones - but so is Kerry - and so have been many, many powerful men before them. They would be the rascals who thought up the dumbing down of America. See Ginger's post in the 'Have you read it' forum:
Post URL: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =24#105508

 While many Christians do think environmental and natural disasters are going to take place - they are not in favor of hurrying it along.
This is the agenda and affect of the anti-Christ; and to suggest Christians ought to be working to bring it about, is as wrong minded as those who Paul admonished for teaching we should sin as much as possible, to increase and magnify God's grace!
Its true there are passages of prophecy that describe an Earth in trouble. Some of this is of natural origin, earthquakes increasing and so on. Much of it is no doubt caused by the evil men will do.Some of it will be God's judgment - but there is nothing men can do to bring it about or stop it. So, the Ford exec is way off base with his comment; and George Dubya may be in the back pocket of the anit-christ. But, IMO, most any president would be. I suspect Kerry would not have been the improvement you dream of.

But what I object to, is the blanket statement that Christians don't care about our environment. Sure, some are ignorant and selfish and careless; but this is true of people in general - not Just Christians. For example - my neighbor has spread Diazanon all over his two acre lawn - to kill the earth worms - to discourage the moles. I asked him not to do this when he mentioned the plan. I explained how it would kill many many birds and pollute the ground water. But, as I am picking up dead birds every day now - it seems he didn't care for my advice or respect my request. He is agnostic. So, I could say: Agnostics don't care about the environment and are terrible polluters; b/c of my neighbor's example; and besides, as they don't believe in God they don't care about His Creation or worry about answering for their actions - Therefore - they are all selfish pricks who use up all they can and destroy at will. I could say that, and be just as correct as Amanda was in her comment.


Amanda:
// Ok first off eve came from adams rib or so they say right? so man came first according to the bible. //

Yes, God first created Adam - but it was your "Therefore" comment I object to. The order of creation is not an indication of the relative value - not at all. If you have been taught this, then you have been taught wrong.

The definition of an Apostil is what I said - a believer who was an eye witness to the Life, ministry Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This includes Mary Magdalene. No, she was not one of the 12 - but I would suppose it would have been problematic for a woman to trapse around from town to town as the 12 did. And no doubt, it would have given a wrong impression. Never the less, she was an important person - loved and valued.

// And you even admitted that no man woud have followed a woman jesus. So yeah, I take that as men are more important and more trusted. //

OK Amanda, consider - even today - there have been no female presidents. I expect Hillary to give it a try - but it won't fly. This has more to do with the hearts of men,  than the will of God. And I'll tell you something else - women would not have tolerated it - and largely wouldn't today. Women Hate taking orders from other women. It rubs the average female against the grain to have another tell them what to do. Its not just the prejudice of Men that make a female US president unlikely - and would have made a female Christ less effective.  None of this means what you take it to mean - that God undervalues the girls - People do - God loves all equally.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Angola Cheeba

  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #354 on: May 26, 2005, 08:22:00 PM »
No, not all Christians are against the environment. Just like not all liberals are scum sucking vermin (I know, its hard to believe something Rush Limbaugh says isnt true, but I swear it is! :smile: )

But the Christians Ive heard that are against the environement use that very excuse that god made the earth for us and we can abuse it.

The whole Bible is filled with a favor towards males. It woudl not be written that way, had men not writeen it. But because the human slant is in there, and at the time, women were not considered so great, they made it more male centered. If it is like you say and God favors all humans the same, then why is the bible written that way? Wouldnt the people write it the way god wanted and not the way they wanted it? I think if god really had written it, then there woudlnt be confusion about this.

Thats my point. I feel that because god did not personally write it, men put a slant on it they felt was necessary. I dotn feel it was and therfore I dont feel it is the exact testimnoy of god and cant believe it. I want all the info the way it was supposed to be written. And, well, i think its pretty lame.

There HAVE been female presidents. Just not USA female presidents. So no that isnt true. And most anyone dosnt like to be told what to do. Ive worked for many women and liked it. And men and liked it. Adn some i didnt. But I think you are outdated in thinking many women wouldnt like a female pres. You do not know that, and I know many women who WOULD like a female president. I think the reason men dont want one is because they dotn feel safe with a woman in charge. And pooh pooh on that. Oh, certainly it isnt just men. But when a society teaches its citezens to make women less powerful and to think of women as sex objects and docile creatures, then it isnt one person or anothers fault. It is societies fault. And we can change that one attitude at a time. Why not start with religion?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
\'homme est ne\'libre et partout il est dans les fers.
Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
--------------------------------------------

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #355 on: May 26, 2005, 10:08:00 PM »
Your correct that men penned the Bible and that it is the word of God. I think where you fall into era, is thinking that women were not valued b/c they were given different responsibilities.
You make the assumption that b/c men are the spokespersons  and they ones out in public doing the street preaching that the women had no value. I am only trying to explain this is not a valid assumption.

The role of men and women, in most any society, has for most of history, been different. I don't think this is an accidental quirk of fate. There are basic differences in the psychology of the sexes that seem to be hard wired. For instance, men tend to get their sense of identity and self worth from their employment. How they are perceived at work can have a huge effect on their over all sense of worth and well being.

Women on the other hand - even if they do work outside of the home, tend to derive their sense of self worth from hearth and home. They do care that they are respected at work - not saying otherwise - but their sense of self worth is more tied to home and family.

These differences seem to be present from birth. Nature, in this case, over rides nurture.
Children raised in gender neutral environments; meaning they are not encouraged to play 'sex appropriate' role games; or play with such toys; Once given the opportunity  - little boys will grab the cars and guns; and little girls the dolls and toy phones.

And then too, we have the obveious difference of child bearing. This is and has always been a factor in the roles of the sexes in society.

I think God knew what He was doing balancing out the needs of families and society in such a way.
And as far as God is concerned, both are of equal value. Its people who under value the woman's role in society.

I am not saying a woman ought not be able to work at what ever kind of job she wants - or that she shouldn't be paid equally well as a man doing the same work. But I am saying a woman's role in running her household and raising her family is just as valuable as the role men play by working at a job with a living wage.

I do think the traditional role of women in the home is hugely important for the health of families and society - and I think this has for to long been denied.

But back to Biblical writings - You should consider, that as well as being a book about God, filled with prophecy and revelation, it is also a history book. When you read the Biblical text, you are getting a snap shot of the society that existed when the book was written.

Far from what you take as being in era, and so not trust worthy - the Bible records these people and places very accurately. The history and sociology you so object to, proves the trustworthiness of the Biblical text.

The president thing - I was talking about the US of A - and I did mention that later in the paragraph.

I know other nations have had female heads of state. Great Briton for one; India and Argentina and no telling how many others. They've done a good job too. I even saw on the History Channel where they think one of the ancient Egyptian Pharos was a woman. But she wore a fake beard and passed herself off as a man so as to rule unopposed. They think.

And there are several noted women who have lead armies. There is Deborah and Joan of Arch and the Celtic mom who got angry and took on Rome, who's name I can't recall - but the point being there are always exceptions to the general rules.

As for the US of A - I know you are right - More and more are far more ready to cast a vote for a female US president. Hillary might even prove me wrong. But I am thinking it will be a while longer - that still more often than not, there will be a gut reaction against a woman running that exist in both sexes.

And of corse your right women can and do work well together. I am trying to explain something more subliminal. An undercurrent in the make up of most females that resist being under the authority of another. In the work place, it can be and more often is subdued; not often present on a conscience level. But in a voting booth? I don't know - I suspect it will keep many from voting the way their rhetoric would indicate. But I could be wrong.

*[ This Message was edited by: BuzzKill on 2005-05-26 19:11 ]

I keep forgetting stuff  :roll: 'bout this:

//made the earth for us and we can abuse it. //

Are you sure your not hearing "Use" and thinking "abuse"? Its not the same thing. Of corse we are to Use the Earth - How can we not?  We can use the various things the Earth  provides to live comfortable lives with out abusing the enviroment. If you don't believe this - then you best unplug every electric thing in your home and figure out some way to heat your home with out using any natural products - you get the idea. But you don't need to do that - b/c we can use these things and not destroy or even hurt the Planet. [ This Message was edited by: BuzzKill on 2005-05-26 19:21 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #356 on: May 26, 2005, 10:26:00 PM »
just saw tom cruise talking about his scientology belief on tv... whew!  :silly:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #357 on: May 26, 2005, 10:40:00 PM »
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #358 on: May 28, 2005, 04:20:00 PM »
Dear Buzz,
No. The main charachters in the book are men. And they seem to favor men. I just dotn see a supernatural being or diety as being human, so why call god a him and why woudl it be sacriligious if I didnt? Because of sexism.

And still today, the church acts as if women have no vaule. No women popes. No womne can be priests. Women still have to wear "appropriate cloths" to church (not all the time, but you deffinetly get judged and stared at like an asshole if you dont). I just feel it is a sexist book. You do nnot. Ok. We dotn agree. That is ok too.

To respond to your role of men and women in history statement, we do not live in that societry anyomore. We SHOULD NOT live in that mindset now. We have too much knowledge and too much past history to coorect us. I just dotn like people who continue to choose to believe it cant be changed because we are "different". So what?? White people are different from black people in skin tone. Does that mena it is ok to treat either like shit because of skin color? Of course not.

Women have the same thing too. It is more how their looks are percieved that effect theri sense of well being. And that simply should not be.

I dont think these days many women care about their home as their worth. I think it is more derived form looks as we are a society that places worht on looks.

And the little kids playing w/toys. Bullshit. That is a societal thing. We teach our kids to play wiht gender appropriate toys. My niece has dinosaur, cars, trucks, dolls, ect. She likes the dinosaurs and the trucks the most. And she likes her dolls to. Can you imagine though in our homophobic society if a little boy played with dolls? He would be called gay and told not to do it, unless his parents werent assholes.

I think WE DID THAT. God had nothing to do with how we developed our society. You said yourelf god can only influence desicion. She dosnt make them for us. We make our society our way, not gods.

In regards to the bible as a history book thing. I woudl liketo quote ben harper.
"As long as someone else writes your history, it will always remain no more than a mystery."
I dotn beleive history is accurate. and the bible even more so.

K- whre is the historical proof of all this? Take the word of the bible for it?

No no. Ive heard many Christians say god gave us the earth for man to use and therefore they can drive as many SUVs and throw away as muvch plastic and paper as they want. I use a fireplace. And I dont have AC (in my car either.) And I walk as much as possible.

Well, I guess we will not agree on this issue. I thank you for putting in the time to respond though and I appreciate the input.
Amanda
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline GregFL

  • Posts: 2841
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
A cult?
« Reply #359 on: May 28, 2005, 06:08:00 PM »
Women were treated better in biblical times?

THAT is the biggest load of crap in this entire thread.

Wait until I get back home..I will be happy t post many biblical references absolutely pointing out what this is..a laughing mockery of the truth.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »