BS: Church joins real world

Subject: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 12:11 PM

The Anglican church has at last ignored bigotry in their ranks and Church of England allows equality for women in senior management roles.

Of course, those who see women as inferior are being accommodated, but nobody expects religious clubs to make sense. One stone tablet at a time though...

Women bishops

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 12:49 PM

there are at least 3 misconceptions [deliberate or otherwise] in your post musket.
1 for most of those opposed to womens ordination/bishops it was not bigotry but an understanding of biblical teaching and church tradition [ I am not giving any personal opinion here].
some of those opposed were women also, and opposed for the same reason.
2 I doubt if bishops see themselves as senior management, but as spiritual overseers......though hopefully not in a "holier than thou" way.
3 Christian teaching is not that women are inferior but that together with men ,are made in the image of God.

genesis 1 v 27
so God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:04 PM

Pete... the problem has been that many church leaders in MANY churches HAVE used a debatable interpretation of numerous translations of assorted scriptures to assert that men should have a special position in theological debates. One reason was to have control over heredity and clan/culture/family situations. Being generally larger, stronger and not burdened by pregnancy, men were ABLE to achieve that dominant position.

It takes a long time for reason to overcome the drive for power & control.

As Musket says.."one stone tablet at a time."

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:28 PM

Would "mis-understanding of biblical teaching", (convenient, or not so) be a more appropriate term?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:29 PM

Err.. A bishop is a job, subject to UK employment law. The bigotry clause that religious organisations enjoy in order to discriminate is slowly being demolished.

Churches, like any large multinational companies are large enough to influence normal people and therefore should exhibit high moral standards. We expect it, though not get it, from banks and others, berating tax and living standards of producers of goods, so churches should be scrutinised too.

Quoting the bible is irrelevant from the minute you employ staff.

Are you rejoicing pete? Are you happy that the church has taken a stance to make itself more relevant to people?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: selby
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:35 PM

I am with Musket with this, it is rather strange that an organization who's boss for 60 years is a woman, has taken so long to let some of the staff be women.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 05:22 PM

As pete says, how can women be bigoted against women?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 05:40 PM

There seems as much religious politics, as other issues, involved in the issue in the recent past.

background on some of the related issues 

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 05:48 PM

" how can women be bigoted against women?"

Ask Phyllis Schlafly

A lot of the answer 'seems' to lie in their indoctrination by men...particularly men in the church. Then, I suppose, we can debate whether it is 'bigoted' or just a difference of opinion... but Phyllis sure polarized the parties!

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 06:01 PM

Not too many posts yet, but the opponents of equality appear to be a God botherer and a bigot.

I have just returned from the pub and our local vicar was in good cheer, celebrating in fact. His wife was ordained the same year as him yet his career progression, should he wish for promotion was always better than hers, and that upset them for many years apparently. Good for them. She wasn't with him, (her parish(s) are a few miles away and she was at a meeting) but he said she too was celebrating with members of her church council.

Not being religious, I have nothing personal to celebrate, but every decent person might feel that the world is moving in the right direction now that the most discriminating organised political fronts have a large chapter that realises how irrelevant they appeared to the vast majority of people.

Most people are too sophisticated to blindly accept divisive bigotry as something they wish to tolerate.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 06:13 PM

Who says that the organized church is the 'organism', the Body of Christ, as Jesus was referring to?

Who says our politicians are more concerned with their constituents, than they are to the 'special interest' groups??...and pretending that they're in it for OUR benefit??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 06:40 PM

" how can women be bigoted against women?"

How about this one?

""I think [women] should be armed but should not vote…women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it…it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.

It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 – except Goldwater in '64 – the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted.""Ann Coulter

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 07:13 PM

But will it put bums back on pews?

Is that the question of the century?

Or is the question of the century "do I give a flying fart?"

One downside of having lady bishops is that one might no longer be able to say "Good morning, Your Grace! And how's your bishopric these days?"

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 07:30 PM

Thanks for the link Bill, but surely to be opposed to "feminism" and homosexual "marriage", does not equate to "bigotry against women"

Both of these positions appear to be highly debatable?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 07:49 PM

but surely to be opposed to "feminism" and homosexual "marriage", does not equate to "bigotry against women"

Being opposed to feminism and gay marriage (coo, that was hard to say!) definitely equates to bigotry against women. And against a lot of men to boot.

Try typing without all those speech marks. In the words of The Lord, let your speech be yay yay, nay nay. Some of us get bollocked by the moderators here for doing just that and get our posts deleted and our PMs blocked. You, the propagator of poisonous nonsense, simply get protected by them. No wonder you carry on like you do, bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 07:52 PM

I dunno, ake... those two women sure advance the attitude that men are 'superior'. We could debate all day whether that amounts to bigotry. It is not a matter of definitions, but of fairness & rights. Women are gradually obtaining rights and recognition they should have had all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 08:17 PM

I'm all for fairness Bill, but surely "feminism" is an ideology and as such can be debated without fear of being labelled a "bigot"

Many women see their premier role as bearers and nurturers of their offspring.... careers take second place. That does not make them "inferior" to men.
In fact, some cultures see motherhood as a positive life choice, unfortunately our money orientated society wants women as wage slaves first and foremost.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 08:29 PM

Christ on a bloody bike.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 08:33 PM

AnnCoulter on gay marriage, and divorce 

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 08:42 PM

""Gay marriage won't lead to dog marriage. It is not a slippery slope to rampant inter-species coupling. When women got the right to vote, it didn't lead to hamsters voting. No court has extended the equal protection clause to salmon.""
― Bill Maher, 

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 08:56 PM

I think the Bible doesn't have all that much to say about homosexuality, although it's on at least a few of St. Paul's lists of sins. Some scripture scholars say that what Paul condemned was the Roman practice of keeping young boys for sexual pleasure. Maybe so.

I prefer to think that scripture reflected the mores of the times. And the times are different now, so morals should also be.

I see morals as a matter of function, not rules. What's moral, is what functions well for the health and well-being of individuals and of society. I think there's an element of sacredness in morality - it is worthwhile to hold the human being as sacred, the union of human beings as sacred, and the earth and all its creatures as sacred. I think there is wisdom to be found in the moral principles expressed in the sacred writings of various cultures, and I don't think that decisions to disregard those ancient principles should be made lightly. But in the end, we have to follow principles that work best for our times.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 10:13 PM

"Many women see their premier role as ..."etc.

*sigh*..of course! That is not the issue! Anyone should be free to choose & define their 'role' as whatever they wish within the limits of ability and biology. It is when men choose & define women's roles FOR them that it becomes a problem.

A large % of women may always choose to stay at home and bear & raise children... but it is widely possible now to do that AND have careers. There's no particular reason a woman can't have children AND be a Bishop... or a bricklayer!

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:18 AM

I agree with you on that Bill, but we were actually discussing whether or not Phyllis Schlafly was being bigoted to women by opposing "feminism".

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:29 AM

Many women in the feminist literature that I have read, see marriage and childbearing as "oppression".

There are always debatable points in any ideology.
Perhaps the woman in question sees a mothers "role" as taking precedence over a career, hence it becomes a point of debate, not simply masculine oppression.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:32 AM

Don't wish to press the subject, but you did suggest that Phyllis Schlafly was an example of a woman who was bigoted against other women?

Sorry about all the short posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:49 AM

Yes, indeed, "Phyllis Schlafly was being bigoted to women by opposing 'feminism.'"

One definition of bigoted might be "not being able to accept any ideas other than one's own." And Phyllis Schlafly was certainly guilty of that, rest her wicked soul.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:50 AM

Err... Many women, to use his phrase,want, deserve and rightly expect a career. The majority of doctors and solicitors in The UK are women, the vast majority of managers in the public sector and for tomorrow? The majority at university.

So far as this thread is concerned, it's about destroying misogyny, not celebrating it, moron.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:52 AM

"Church joins the real world" - isn't that a bit of a contradiction in terms?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:52 AM

Oh, Sweet Jesus, preserve me. Wikipedia says Phyllis is 89 and still alive, and that she's a Catholic.
Maybe I do need to resign from the Catholic Church....
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 03:22 AM

Well, you didn't expect her to be a Quaker?

Shimrod does have a literal point but I would point out that millions of real people to greater or lesser extent still cling to it as a quasi reality therefore to them it is real.

Hence you can either forcefully remove peoples' comfort blanket which isn't nice when you think about it, or you can encourage them to work within the bounds of decency, which this is about.

There's still a long way to go. Seeing gay people as people, removing facility for those still wedded to bigotry, disestablishment from the legislature and judging those not signed up to their club. I'd like to see more done to protect children and vulnerable adults for that matter. But as I said, one stone tablet at a time.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:12 AM

Oh bum. There I go agreeing with Mither again.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:50 AM

We'll have you quaffing my vintage of champagne next Bridge...

If I ask you what the time is and you give me an answer, you can put the bubbly down as tax deductible too....



On a more serious note, it doesn't surprise me that anyone would agree with me, or disagree for that matter. I find it odd that equality in the job market isn't seen as a fundamental agreement before looking any further?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 07:59 AM

By the way Bridge, anything from 2002 is worth having but make sure the cork is wet at that age.

2003 was a bad harvest year and the vintage was dull. My toast to Thatcher's demise was a brut of that vintage. A second bottle awaits Scargill's demise.

2009 is turni....



What's this thread about again?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 08:00 AM

Does any reasonable person see marriage and childbearing as "masculine oppression of women"?

I have no idea who the lady is, or her views, but I was debating the definition of "bigotry" with Bill.
Is it "moronic" to debate the definition of "bigotry"?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 08:16 AM

Oh, that's better. Scargill was a hero, even if misguided and outgunned by the bitch Thatcher.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 08:37 AM

It is interesting to take a historic look back on the poor state of the lives of women in the past, in celebrating the much more respectful and reasonable position women have in many of today's societies-though not all.

I suspect, even today, some folks would prefer to live in the "male dominated" societies of the past, such as in Rome where women had little decision-making power in their personal life choices, nor that in the general society.


Ancient Roman Women: A Look at Their Lives 

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 08:48 AM

"Is it "moronic" to debate the definition of "bigotry"?"

Depends on your understanding of bigotry.

Or moron for that matter.

If the tam o'shanter fits....

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:58 AM

Ake.. Joe Offer came as close as *I* can to fitting Phyllis into the classification. You kind of read into some remark of mine a definition *I* did not use.

And Musket just made the point that I would. Bigotry is not a clear and simple thing to provide a short definition of.

It is not important to pin a label on her... she is just a paradigm example of a women who wants to place limits on what *all women* are or should be.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 12:47 PM

I was on a train from New York the other day, and they seat you with other people who are alone, and I had lunch with a guy from Australia who was on his way to this conference. Glad his side won!

Not important to pin a label on her, then you label her, is kinda funny, you have to admit. Whoever She was.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:01 PM

Well, perhaps Phyllis is a "mad woman" or a woman who "hates" women, I don't know anything about her, but does opposing "feminism", make any ordinary woman who wants to get married, have a family and bring them up, a bigot?

Most women in my area would think it ridiculous to call marriage and childbearing "oppression".

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:06 PM

Ake, you need to listen to Phyllis Schlafly before you defend her. She's a feckin' ravin' lunatic! The likes of her, would make even you blush. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:24 PM

I'm not defending her Joe, I haven't read anything about her and she is only incidental to the point under discussion, which was, is it bigotry to oppose "feminism", or parts of "feminism", or someones opinions about "feminism"......if one is a woman?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:36 PM

Surely the church has never existed in the real world, but rather in a world invented by primitive men (!) who sought to explain the world around them by creating stories of super-beings with magical powers.
It's all too silly!

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:38 PM

seems to me ,that finding the most extreme example to argue against a more moderate opinion is probably not very fair. that might be extreme feminists ,who, I would argue, do despise their own gender by equating motherhood and being a wife as oppression, or the lady that I had never heard of who seems to discourage career women......though evidently heading up her own organization !.
interesting that ed provides a link to roman women. paul, often characterized by bible skeptics as a woman hater, actually elevated their status in the church.....though a lot less than modern leanings.
I am surprised that joe thinks that biblical ethics reflect their era.
from what I understand of the secular and pagan practise of the time, I would expect homosexual practise to have been celebrated, were that the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 05:48 PM

ake--- you are in a cycle of continuously arguing against a position that no one here has actually made! You have somehow extracted the idea of 'bigotry' from other points and are beating on a "straw man".

And Pete... you are doing something similar. You guys need to take the comments of others as they are made and not make these fanciful jumps into positions that no one has actually held.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 05:57 PM

Good observations Bill D....and homosexuality frequently seems creep into many of the posts, regardless of the op topic.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 06:59 PM

Bill it was you who brought Phyllis into the discussion, with I suppose the purpose of supporting your contention that women can be bigoted against women; but the lady in question seems to be a bit of a "loose cannon" to say the least and nominating her as an example does not prove any point in regard to opposition to "feminism" being bigotry?

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 07:05 PM

Any number of reasonable women can be against the excesses of "radical feminism" and certainly do not deserve to be labelled as bigots for their views

Sorry again for the multiple posts....PC is playing up.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 07:08 PM

I have seen misogyny committed by some women. When men hate women its horrid. When women do it sure seems far worse.

There were women who voted against women being able to be Bishops, the minds of which I fail to understand. For me the argument is not about treating men and women exactly the same, but with equal rights under the law. Men and women are vety different and have different needs beyond the basics of survival. But treating then equally under the law, with respect to each gender, is surely sensible and fairer than constantly setting them apart based on gender alone?

I cannot for the life of me see why femald Bishops should be such a challenge to anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Church joins real world
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 07:12 PM

Ed, I think the other trolls have left the thread, hurry along and catch them up.