Posted on 08/12/2011 2:16:46 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Isaiah 3:12 “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”
There is a reason that you want a man in charge. Good example is Angela Merkle the German PM who everytime she meets with the French President Nicolas Sarkozy get owned by him. She goes in saying one thing and comes out saying whatever Sarkozy wants. But I suppose you’ll just have to learn the hard way.
I think the correct term is “SUBMITTED.” There is a big difference between “submitting” as in “surrendering/giving up any independence” and “submitting” ideas, plans. There is very little “submission” in a wife in her proper role, but a “submitted” wife knows how to submit decisions, plans, opinsions, and ideas to her spouse in the interest of comity and agreement.
context context...Angela Merkel...Margaret Thatcher are far more preferable to oh you know, Hitler, Stalin, Mao et al...
its better when men and women lead society together rather than seek constant domination or abuse over the other.
Many of the most effective leaders of the abolition movement were women. some of the greatest Evangelizers in the far corners of the globe have been women before any Christian men ever stepped foot in certain places.
and there are prophetesses (Huldah, Deborah et al) queens (Queen of Sheba et al) and even single businesswomen (Lydia) spoken well of in the Bible. And in general its not smart to nitpick verses to make blanket statements at the expense of other verses, teachings, and precedents. God is not meant to be put in a box. Neither are women or human governments.
Which is why, even though I’m a Palin supporter, that question ticked me off.
Eh, God made woman to be a help meet to man not the other way around. It is pretty consistent throughout the Bible and even Deborah was a second choice to Barak who wimped out and insisted that she come along.
I’m not saying that women haven’t done good just that they are not meant to be in positions of leadership or power over men.
Oh, and by the way it was Mao’s mistress that came up with the cultural revolution (you do remember the gang of four right?).
Or how about 1 Corinthians 14:34-35? “As in all congregations of God’s people, women should keep silent at the meeting. They have no permission to talk, but should keep their place as the law directs. If there is something they want to know, they can ask their husbands at home. It is a shocking thing for a woman to talk at the meeting.”
Also, who said anything about abuse? Just because men are supposed to be dominant doesn’t mean it’s abusive (just more feminist propaganda and shaming language but I didn’t expect anything but that from your likes).
I guess you’ll leave the country if Palin or Bachmann wins the presidency.
By the way, what is your opinion of male Freepers who label attractive female pedophiles as “not guilty”?
No, I’m not some whiny liberal that throws a temper-tantrum every time something doesn’t go my way. That said I think it far more likely that Hillery will be our first female president than either Palin or Bachmann. You have a lot of guys on FR that just go nuts for the semi-hot republican candidates because they think that they are easy wins and that they lock up the women vote. That’s not typically true though so I think they’ll continue to be disappointed. In any case it will be just another sign of the times if/when we get our first female president and just another marker on the road to oblivion for this country.
I’m sorry you feel that way. Since I don’t have a husband to financially support me, I have no choice but to have my career. I don’t know why any conservative would have a problem with that.
“Since I don’t have a husband to financially support me, I have no choice but to have my career. I don’t know why any conservative would have a problem with that.”
I don’t know where you got that from my post. I’m not talking about women and their careers, I’m talking about leadership positions for this nation. Big difference, you can have any kind of “career” that you want but if you are talking about political leadership positions as a “career” than yes I would say those should be off the table for you. No a big impact for all but a hand full of women by the way so I’m fairly sure you would not be adversely impacted by that.
So quit trying to twist things to frame yourself as some kind of victim, your not, because of affirmative action and all sorts of laws, regulations, rules, etc you have more of an advantage in the job market than most men do, if you want to put in the time and sacrifices necessary to achieve that success.
No man gets to say what is off the table for me except my husband, should I marry. Period. I am finished with this conversation.
Eh, with the chip you’ve got on your shoulder I doubt any man is going to want to marry you. Who wants some woman with a bad attitude. In any case good luck ... you’re going to need it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.