Male Domination of Christianity and a Pregnant 10 Year Old
That the State of Ohio has obstacles to a ten year old getting an abortion is more evidence anti abortion is not about "saving lives." Statistics show the dangers of a birth, even if cesarian, poses much more risk for a little girl than it does for an adult. If anti-abortion is not about saving lives, what is it about?
Mega preacher TD Jakes recently gave a sermon that explains much of conservative Christianity. He said the social order laid out in the Bible is not being followed. The appropriate role for women is being violated. He meant; women must be controlled by men.
The history of this control is not hard to follow. When the Bible was written less than one percent of the population was literate. These were men. There is no evidence women wrote any of the Bible. These men wrote into the Bible that males are good, females are bad. That is the message they placed in the made-up story of Adam and Eve. Male authorship has been followed by centuries of male interpretation and application of the Bible to contemporary society. With anti-abortion, the domination's mission can declare victory for men. Praise be to God for all he has given men.
From the Christian male's point of view, women are responsible for all pregnancies. Men are programs to seek sex--they are helpless in the matter. It is up to women, seemingly the more rational and in control of their impulses and passions, to say no and avoid pregnancies. It turns out that men, however, are more rational about religion, they are to be the "spiritual leader" in a relationship, and about abortion. The anti-abortion movement is dominated by men. It is the sex crazed men only who are rational enough to make the call about abortion. The decision is no, it's the woman's fault, give birth as punishment for your sin.
In the ten year old's pregnancy, the welfare of the ten year old was less important than guarding the door to legal abortion. It's a guy thing.
“Anatomically, men pour in. Life begins when men pour in. We were designed to pour in; you were designed to preserve what is poured in,” Jakes told his female congregants. “As it is in the physical, so it is in the spiritual. We are designed to pour in.”, TD Jakes.
ReplyDeleteThat has to be one of the most penis centric, misogynistic, Christian sermons on strict theological complementarianism in the books. Old TD “built to spill” Jakes is skipping his stones across a carnal pond throughout his message. Discern sisters. Don’t let The Book get in your way.
Ardy B: TD Jakes "men were designed, women were designed"
DeleteSounds exactly like Catholic theology to me, just a bit earthy. I wonder is Catholic theologians would use the word "designed?" Mostly they like flowery terms like "God created, blah blah." The outcome is the same, however. Men write the rules. The rules are men rule, women obey.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletetsm -- "opposites are really complimentary" I see you have been reading philosophy written by old white men. Some of it is also, as you point out, in ancient non white men. Whatever the country, whatever the culture, whatever the religion, it is always ancient as opposed to modern and always men. What's really humorous is "opposites are really complimentary" and yield "some greater whole." Is that why there are no Catholic (and equally unenlightened Protestant denominations) women clergy? That is, you are saying that by having women serve the men in their high clergy positions the part women play in service to men makes the position of clergy more productive than if women themselves served in clergy.
DeleteThe high-toned words you like to use are not appropriate for this nonsense. The correct term for your post is bull$hit.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAs to the material you submitted following this post, they were deleted. I've asked you before not to repeat the same posts you have already submitted.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletetsm -- "I was merely trying to point out a few facts you seemed to have overlooked..."
ReplyDeleteYou use words in ways that are not helpful to our discussions. Here, you use the word "facts." I take it that when you claim you and your wife provide something greater than what you could have provided individually, that is a "fact." Certainly a man and woman are needed to produce children, but they do not even need to know each other. So, that statement is your opinion, not a fact. If you could work on separating your opinion from fact things would go better.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletetsm "..you could not deny, namely that architects of post modernism...." This is another example of why your posts are so often dumped. In the previous post you slide off the edge of systematic thinking by saying "facts" are whatever you think them to be. That is the way Trump thinks, he thinks it's a "fact" he won the election. Now, in this latest post you are sliding in a different direction. You are saying our discussion is about "post modernism." Post modernism has many branches, design, art etc. We were talking about old white men and the long standing claim men are superior to women. You jumped away from that to something else. Is it possible to perhaps not change the subject matter when you are losing an argument?
Delete