When Should Women Obey Their Husbands?

[oldbadger]

I'm happily married with tongue in cheek.

Great!
I'm happily married, hand in hand.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

And the lords did not give men power in the UK, we had to fight for it, not that anyone is bothered about that. But men still gave the vote to women, even if it was because of their actions, a lot of which were illegal.

Again, you are wrong. Women fought for the right to vote. Suffragettes were falsely arrested, tortured, beaten, and murdered while standing for the vote.

That's pretty audacious to suggest that the suffragettes acted illegally to attain equal rights in the voting booth. It's also very obvious you are unaware of the history.

We follow the divine print which is expressed consciousness in physical terms, yes. It explains evolution.

No, I'm afraid it doesn't. Please do yourself a favor and look up evolutionary theory on Wikipedia or a similar online resource. Your attempt at blurring the lines between scientific rigor and religious interpretation is resulting in a profound misunderstanding of the theory.

I'll pass if you don't mind. Destroying the family is not right, and I never, in my wildest dreams, thought women could have done it.

If you choose not to research the most foundational writings of the philosophy, then your claim to have an informed opinion about it is illegitimate. Your opinion then is formed from a confirmation bias.

Whether it is the sharp end of the spear or the blunt end makes no difference. One uses the other and follows the other. There is no difference.

I doubt a Christian would agree that Westboro Baptist Church represents mainline Christianity. Every movement has a lunatic fringe. Look for the mainline to find better representation.

I think anyone could if you listen to the right women or search the net. I am not saying they will will be ''mainstream'' feminists. They will have to watch their manners if they are within mainstream media.

Name three. I'll go look them up when offer examples.

It is fact that single parent families are more problematic. It is fact that feminism went out to destroy the family.

I am a feminist and that is, again, incorrect. Woefully incorrect.

The only way to the Father is through the son, not the daughter.
The law was given but not kept; that does not mean the law is wrong, but that people have to keep it.

Are you evangelizing? What is your intent with this last paragraph?

 

[Maya Kaath]

A husband and wife should consult together to come to decisions. If there has to be a tie-breaker, they should jointly decide what that should be. Men and women are both to be obedient to God and to work consultatively together, for they are, as the scriptures say, the two wings of the bird of humanity.

"The world of humanity has two wings—one is women and the other men. Not until both wings are equally developed can the bird fly. Should one wing remain weak, flight is impossible. Not until the world of women becomes equal to the world of men in the acquisition of virtues and perfections, can success and prosperity be attained as they ought to be." (“Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá”, sec. 227, p. 302)

That's from the Bahá'í Writings.

I note that none of the quotes adduced from the Bible are from Christ. His most socially significant commandment with regard to marriage was that men not be able to put their wives aside "for any reason". The Pharisees found this difficult to take and asked why Moses had given them a law that said they could just divorce their wives for any reason with a simple decree.

Jesus' response bears careful consideration, because He is stating an important facet of revelation. He says, "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so."

In this simple, wonderful response, Jesus makes several things clear:

1. God doesn't change, but we do.
2. God changes certain teachings based on our capacity to comprehend and obey.
3. There is a divine standard that we may not be ready to hear.

We have no words from Christ about the roles of men and women within a marriage, though we do have His treatment of His female disciples to consider. I believe it is also significant that every Prophet of God has had at least one female disciple, such as Miriam, Yasodhara, Mary Magdalene, Khadijah, Tahireh or Bahiyyih Khanum, who stand beside Him among their male counterparts and do great things. The teachings about obedience of women came largely from Paul and may have stemmed from the number of emboldened, outspoken women in the nascent body of believers. But, if one looks at how Christ called for more justice to be applied to women in the home and how Muhammad further elevated the status of women (granting them property rights among other things), it's shouldn't be surprising that the teaching changes because "from the beginning it was not so".

In the Qur'an Muhammad calls upon husbands and wives to "take mutual counsel together, according to what is just and reasonable." (Sura 65:6) The equality of women and men within a Bahá'í marriage is attested to by the wedding vow, which is simply: "Verily, we will all abide by the will of God."

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There is a gulf between those who can and those who can't. In between that gulf is a whole host of intermediates The man is the head of the woman, that is not the thinking of the secular western society. It cares little for God's law but more for man's power orientation, which in itself is a seeking of God, just in the wrong way.

Sorry on the slow reply, this thread seems to be moving faster than I do...lol

Not sure I really understand what you mean. I've met sexist secularists, and I've met Christians who see the genders as equal, though there's always the 'no-true Christian' factor to consider when talking to Christians of various views. But I daresay secularists generally don't see men as the head of women, and certain varieties of Christians do.

I'm unsure how to respond to the part about seeking God in the wrong way though. I just don't know what you mean.

 

[Ingledsva]

It was I who made the point why would you need to say it. And either way, the man is the stronger gender. That is fact. You live within a man's world.

And obviously I have to say it AGAIN!

Strength does NOT make anyone superior to another!

A small monkey is stronger than YOU!

Is it superior to you? Should you bow to it, and let it take the lead in your life - because it is stronger?

Obviously NOT!

*

 

[Ingledsva]

What patriarchal society are we talkjng about now? What era? This seems to be something in your own head, and a rather strange thought at that

The idea that we don't still have sexism in most modern societies is just wrong.

We marched, and put in laws, and we still have sexism against women.

Black people marched for civil rights, changed laws, and we still have inequality, and racism.

The LGBTQIA community has marched, and had law changes, and they are still discriminated against.

The facts of the matter are that these things don't really change in the minds of bigots. The worst just go underground, and the rest just continue their crap.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Circumcision for male nor female is right. Always interesting that the female perspective does not concern herself much with what happens to the boys. In Africa they have botched circumcision that sometimes go septic so they have to have surgery or even die!

It would be nice, for the ''Female Gaze'' to perhaps consider the male once in a while. If not, I have little sympathy for the female when they complain. as they say, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander

You chose the wrong person to try that on.

I have multiple post on this site against MALE and FEMALE mutilation, using personal body autonomy, as my argument. In other words - OTHER people do not have the right to permanently alter another person's body, without their consent. I have suggested that in the case of male religious circumcision, the male could make his own decision at 18, with a special ceremony of joining the community.

*

 

[Debater Slayer]

Are you evangelizing? What is your intent with this last paragraph?

Sometimes I wonder why or how so many people lend so much credence to books that talk about genocide, abuse, and violence in a positive manner. Perhaps that says less about the book than it does such people.

 

[Sand Dancer]

When she feels like it.

 

[Ingledsva]

lol

1. Leaving aside the God citation, seeing as you don't believe in him, what is it in your strange thinking that men are not superiour to women if they are bigger? You think they are less? You think they are equal? Or are you thinking of the false modern day world again? So why the LOL?

2. What discrimination of women? In the UK we had a time when we stopped men being MPs in order that more women could be involved in politics. No matter whether they were any good or not, just because they were women! Is that not sexism? And yet men, who instigate this, are slated for it, and again, I ask, would women have done the same? I doubt it.

1. Bigger or stronger, does not make you superior. A little monkey is stronger than any human male, and a gorilla can be both stronger and bigger. Are they superior to YOU? NO! They are just stronger, or bigger. Human brains are superior to any outward appearance, or strength. And BOTH males and females have these superior brains.

2. The President of the USA had to bring up the disparity between wages, for the same jobs, between women and men, - in his State of the Union Address! Think about it. Women are still thought of as sexual body parts. Their sexualized body parts are used to sell pretty much anything. This sexualizing of women leads to such incidences, as males OINKING at women (to embarrass and demoralize) those whom don't comply with their men's sexualized ideas about women.

According to the CDC - "An estimated 19.3 percent of women have been raped at one point in their lives." That is almost 1 in every 5 women.

Additionally, they tell us - nearly 44 percent of women have experienced some other form of sexual violence; and 15 percent of women have been stalked.

Obviously A lot of work still needs to be done in this area.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

But if you are going to take it to that level, which you obviously are, then they ARE superior.

That is why you live in a mans world, cities with infrastructure built be men, oceans mapped out by men etc etc. Women might be adding tons now, but it is not needed. We were doing it before and would continue on without them if they stopped, which seems to be the prerogative of the woman, which men don't have, however much feminist might say they have.

So live with it, dude!

If you don't understand how thousands of years of Patriarchy put money, power, and education, into the hands of males, while using violence and religion to hold women down, (as well as other cultures that didn't have the money and weapons) and hold such - then why are you even attempting to put forward such ideas as those above?

*

 

[ImaTroll]

Under what conditions, if any, should a woman habitually obey her husband?

if she is financially dependent on her husband like a teenage adolescent, then she should obey him like any dependent child.

Are there any conditions under which a woman should not obey her husband?

if she is capable of making adult decisions on her own and capable of financial independence, then she need not obey her husband as if she were a child.

If a woman should habitually obey her husband, why should she habitually obey her husband?

because she legally and contractually committed herself to a co-dependent relationship with him.

Is a woman who does not habitually obey her husband acting in an immoral manner?

yes, she is violating her husband's conscience. the husband makes the rules for dependents within the household.

If a woman believes her husband is a fool, should she still habitually obey him?

yes, because she is a fool for marrying him in the first place.

If a woman believes her husband is abusive, should she still obey him?

yes, if he's rich and she doesn't want to work for herself. however, if he's poor and she has her own job, then she can leave him.

 

[Robert.Evans]

We don't have to accommodate those who live by their "primordial" nature. We don't have to allow that at all, that's what we built prisons for.

haha... funny. But that is what we all follow. It is called instinct. I know we have intelligence to overcome such things, but not all people have the same philosophy in life. Changing what is God given will always have consequences.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you don't understand how thousands of years of Patriarchy put money, power, and education, into the hands of males, while using violence and religion to hold women down, (as well as other cultures that didn't have the money and weapons) and hold such - then why are you even attempting to put forward such ideas as those above?

*

Clearly what we see will be forced onto the shoulders of men, they were the ones carrying the weight in the first place! But don't forget, whilst they have been holding women down, as you put it, they have also been protecting them and fighting for them. It seems that certain women can only see one side of the fence... theirs.

 

[savagewind]

Clearly what we see will be forced onto the shoulders of men, they were the ones carrying the weight in the first place! But don't forget, whilst they have been holding women down, as you put it, they have also been protecting them and fighting for them. It seems that certain women can only see one side of the fence... theirs.

You only mention good men in your posts. God says there are no good people though. If people would have kept the truth of God and propagated it then there would have been no bad people. See?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Again, you are wrong. Women fought for the right to vote. Suffragettes were falsely arrested, tortured, beaten, and murdered while standing for the vote.

That's pretty audacious to suggest that the suffragettes acted illegally to attain equal rights in the voting booth. It's also very obvious you are unaware of the history.

And you look through rose tinted glasses madam. You said murdered. Citation? I know for a fact that one man died when they were fighting for the vote, (not that you're bothered about that, right) And how do you equate disturbance of the peace and firebombing someones house as being legal. And what of the torture? Citation? I have to say if it did happen, it happen against men also, as it always happening to anyone who starts riots. Please don't go telling me these were peacable rallys.

No, I'm afraid it doesn't. Please do yourself a favor and look up evolutionary theory on Wikipedia or a similar online resource. Your attempt at blurring the lines between scientific rigor and religious interpretation is resulting in a profound misunderstanding of the theory.

That is their interpretation of it, not mine. I don't need to look it up.

If you choose not to research the most foundational writings of the philosophy, then your claim to have an informed opinion about it is illegitimate. Your opinion then is formed from a confirmation bias.

I have seen enough information of it, madam, without going any further into women wanting to break up the family. How many times do I have to read that? How many times do I have to look at what it does to men, and women?
Confirmation bias? Haha. Funny. Like that is not going on with you, right? They had confirmation bias in the firs tplace. Hence the fact people split up now and commit more adultery and then the viloence that often follows it.

I doubt a Christian would agree that Westboro Baptist Church represents mainline Christianity. Every movement has a lunatic fringe. Look for the mainline to find better representation.

I would not consider myself Christian. And some lunatic fringes are so big they become the grament itself.

Name three. I'll go look them up when offer examples.

You are telling me then that women have not said these things? lol. Now that is confirmation bias, or is it a delusion. haha

I am a feminist and that is, again, incorrect. Woefully incorrect.

It was fact. Single parent families of working class origin are more of a problem. That IS fact. It makes no difference what you are. And it IS a fact that women went out to destroy the family as this destroyed the power of the man over them. How sweet of them.

Are you evangelizing? What is your intent with this last paragraph?

Are you trolling or joking? I answered you comment on the goddess. If you don't like it, ignore it. But don't think you are going to speak without getting a response.

 

[Robert.Evans]

And obviously I have to say it AGAIN!

Strength does NOT make anyone superior to another!

Yes it does. People in the police force are called ''their superior'' because of rank, which is another form of power. Do I need to say that again?

A small monkey is stronger than YOU!

So what? They are not human.

Is it superior to you? Should you bow to it, and let it take the lead in your life - because it is stronger?

Obviously NOT!

*

Rubbish. A monkey is not a man. Perhaps all the men should let the women do the fighting in future. They could claim that just because I am stonger than you does not make me superior so I shall let you deal with the nutter before us.

 

[Robert.Evans]

The idea that we don't still have sexism in most modern societies is just wrong.

It matters not what word you use, there is differences and those differeneces will be recognised, even if you choose to say they don't exist.

We marched, and put in laws, and we still have sexism against women.

And still against men.... I suppose you forgot to put that bit in did you?

Black people marched for civil rights, changed laws, and we still have inequality, and racism.

The LGBTQIA community has marched, and had law changes, and they are still discriminated against.

Which backs up what I said. We are different, not the same.

The facts of the matter are that these things don't really change in the minds of bigots. The worst just go underground, and the rest just continue their crap.

*

Are we talking about biggoted women now or biggoted men? Oh, I guess it would be men as your a feminist, right? does that make you a bigot? Just asking.

 

[Robert.Evans]

You chose the wrong person to try that on.

I have multiple post on this site against MALE and FEMALE mutilation, using personal body autonomy, as my argument. In other words - OTHER people do not have the right to permanently alter another person's body, without their consent. I have suggested that in the case of male religious circumcision, the male could make his own decision at 18, with a special ceremony of joining the community.

*

Good. So try putting that into your comments then, otherwise it will sound one sided won't it.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Sometimes I wonder why or how so many people lend so much credence to books that talk about genocide, abuse, and violence in a positive manner. Perhaps that says less about the book than it does such people.

Perhaps it is a book you don't understand. Perhaps you should consider the atrocities that happen now, rather than history from thousands of years ago. And what ''positive manner'' are we speaking of?