By Carl S. ~
The duty of mothers, according to God: "Mothers, raise your children to obey God's word, as revealed in scripture and through his appointed authorities. Raise them to be innocent of sin by protecting them from the influences of the world outside, where the devil goes about seeking those he would entice and devour. Tell your children what you've been taught, what the bible says. Teach your sons theirs is the responsibility of heading a household, and your daughters the duty to obey their husbands, since they represent Christ (even though Jesus never preached this.). Teach the daughters virginity is virtue for, in the bible, "virgin" always means female."
It really is a dangerous world out there. And maybe you're overlooking the danger in trusting the wrong people.
Is it okay with you for Sunday school teachers to lie to your children, since they mean well? Does “meaning well" justify deception, or indifference to whether something is true or not? Should you trust religious men to dictate sex education? Religions make actions that have nothing to do with morality, immoral. Sex is natural, therefore one of the things trusted religious males try to control, sometimes with “authority figure" male clerics to back them. But prohibiting something which is perfectly natural and wonderful is doomed to failure. When something is punishable and at the same time, good, pleasurable, and harmless, the child will all the more be inclined to investigate and participate in discovering what it’s all about. When a child finds that even doing the right thing can bring punishment, he or she will do it in secret. The resulting loss of innocence is necessary for growing up. Religion's tradition of using fear and ignorance to control behavior is a stinking method for raising a child, if you expect that child to become a morally responsible adult. When the good is as punishable as the immoral, what is the lesson conveyed?
Ahem. Isn't religion truly all about sex? More to the point, isn't it male-dominant with a male god made in the image of males; a testosterone-driven deity of creation and destruction? The three Abrahamic religions are created and ruled by males for the benefit of males. Did those ancient beliefs originate by copying other animal systems, like those of male lions with their prides, alpha chimp males with their tribes, etc., all transferred into human harems, where females exist as property, sex partners of the male's choosing? Think of biblical concubines. And how was it Joseph Smith converted so many men to Mormonism, if not by the promise of multiple wives available for their sexual pleasure?
Nowhere in scriptures, nor theologies or teachings of these religions, are the sexual feelings of women considered.According to misogynists St. Paul and St. Augustine, sexuality is to be tolerated (though, they believed, depressingly necessary for breeding), since, they proclaimed, abstinence from sexual relationships is considered a sign of superior morality. Thus spoke those males who couldn't deal with their own sexual urges and inclinations. They preached a "spiritual" side of human nature at war with "sensual” naturalness! This rationalization for not dealing with those "adultery in one's heart" moments when gazing upon a gorgeous woman, is laughable. Today, well known evidence reveals how many of "God’s spokesmen" are in denial and/or hypocritical, about their sexual inclinations. Consider the words of God as delivered by all such males, who really needed/need to see a psychoanalyst.
Nowhere in scriptures, nor theologies or teachings of these religions, are the sexual feelings of women considered. Their feelings don't exist. They are Sirens, drawing unsuspecting men to their doom. Someone must protect men from them, tame them from doing this. Dogmas preach women are to be the property of men, and women are taught to control themselves, while being controlled. (Under Islamic law, if they follow their hearts, they can be, and are, murdered.) This is God's will.
Religious institutions exist for male privileges. They are good old boys clubs. There, men make the laws in their favor, and there they cover for each other when they misbehave. Damage to others and dealing with it, is dealt with through long established male "internal affairs" systems. One example: pedophile priests are permitted to absolve one another. This is a legal method covered under the clergy-confessor privilege, thus making both parties free of prosecution from withholding evidence. Is this evasion of prosecution for raping children something a woman would invent? Religions cover a multitude of their own sins.
Male clergy are given access to children who have been taught to trust them. The rape of children begins with trust. Faith is trust. In no other occupations will you find men who hold themselves experts and authorities on things they are absolutely, totally ignorant about: the existence and minds of supernatural beings, supernatural realms, about what happens after death, etc. - as if they owned such knowledge. (And isn't God always, "the one that got away?")
Biblical scriptures uplift procreation to the height of sacredness. According to those "divinely-inspired” texts, women are just a means to the end of creating ever more babies. This should be no surprise, as all religions are fertility-based. This primitive belief system even now leads to regarding fetuses as having rights of entitlement more valuable than women’s lives.
In Catholicism, women can't be priests. The party line reason for this: If Jesus had wanted women priests, he would have made them. (Of this, another man said, well, since he only made Jewish men priests, ergo, there shouldn't be non-Jewish Catholic priests.) Of course, naturally, only males have the power to absolve anyone of sins! So, if a woman or girl goes to a priest and tells him of her most intimate feelings and urges, if she masturbates or is carrying on an affair, the cleric can vicariously enjoy this secret knowledge. He can also "advise" her on how to handle these matters morally, since he's an expert on the male God's will for her. And all this takes place while refraining from intercourse! So, for women, "Confession" is hardly a "sacrament." Oh no. It's just another exploitation.
The hatred of women and the denials of human rights to them are at the roots of religious dogmas. These are just a few examples. Don't they derive from irrational fears of the power of women over men, and from men ignorant about women? Men who are dedicated to deeply ingrained religious beliefs will never elect a woman to become a head of state. They would sooner vote for a tyrant - preferably a misogynist like their God. All exploitation begins with a "Trust me." Hmm…
It really is a dangerous world out there. And maybe you're overlooking the danger in trusting the wrong people.
Is it okay with you for Sunday school teachers to lie to your children, since they mean well? Does “meaning well" justify deception, or indifference to whether something is true or not? Should you trust religious men to dictate sex education? Religions make actions that have nothing to do with morality, immoral. Sex is natural, therefore one of the things trusted religious males try to control, sometimes with “authority figure" male clerics to back them. But prohibiting something which is perfectly natural and wonderful is doomed to failure. When something is punishable and at the same time, good, pleasurable, and harmless, the child will all the more be inclined to investigate and participate in discovering what it’s all about. When a child finds that even doing the right thing can bring punishment, he or she will do it in secret. The resulting loss of innocence is necessary for growing up. Religion's tradition of using fear and ignorance to control behavior is a stinking method for raising a child, if you expect that child to become a morally responsible adult. When the good is as punishable as the immoral, what is the lesson conveyed?
Ahem. Isn't religion truly all about sex? More to the point, isn't it male-dominant with a male god made in the image of males; a testosterone-driven deity of creation and destruction? The three Abrahamic religions are created and ruled by males for the benefit of males. Did those ancient beliefs originate by copying other animal systems, like those of male lions with their prides, alpha chimp males with their tribes, etc., all transferred into human harems, where females exist as property, sex partners of the male's choosing? Think of biblical concubines. And how was it Joseph Smith converted so many men to Mormonism, if not by the promise of multiple wives available for their sexual pleasure?
Nowhere in scriptures, nor theologies or teachings of these religions, are the sexual feelings of women considered.According to misogynists St. Paul and St. Augustine, sexuality is to be tolerated (though, they believed, depressingly necessary for breeding), since, they proclaimed, abstinence from sexual relationships is considered a sign of superior morality. Thus spoke those males who couldn't deal with their own sexual urges and inclinations. They preached a "spiritual" side of human nature at war with "sensual” naturalness! This rationalization for not dealing with those "adultery in one's heart" moments when gazing upon a gorgeous woman, is laughable. Today, well known evidence reveals how many of "God’s spokesmen" are in denial and/or hypocritical, about their sexual inclinations. Consider the words of God as delivered by all such males, who really needed/need to see a psychoanalyst.
Nowhere in scriptures, nor theologies or teachings of these religions, are the sexual feelings of women considered. Their feelings don't exist. They are Sirens, drawing unsuspecting men to their doom. Someone must protect men from them, tame them from doing this. Dogmas preach women are to be the property of men, and women are taught to control themselves, while being controlled. (Under Islamic law, if they follow their hearts, they can be, and are, murdered.) This is God's will.
Religious institutions exist for male privileges. They are good old boys clubs. There, men make the laws in their favor, and there they cover for each other when they misbehave. Damage to others and dealing with it, is dealt with through long established male "internal affairs" systems. One example: pedophile priests are permitted to absolve one another. This is a legal method covered under the clergy-confessor privilege, thus making both parties free of prosecution from withholding evidence. Is this evasion of prosecution for raping children something a woman would invent? Religions cover a multitude of their own sins.
Male clergy are given access to children who have been taught to trust them. The rape of children begins with trust. Faith is trust. In no other occupations will you find men who hold themselves experts and authorities on things they are absolutely, totally ignorant about: the existence and minds of supernatural beings, supernatural realms, about what happens after death, etc. - as if they owned such knowledge. (And isn't God always, "the one that got away?")
Biblical scriptures uplift procreation to the height of sacredness. According to those "divinely-inspired” texts, women are just a means to the end of creating ever more babies. This should be no surprise, as all religions are fertility-based. This primitive belief system even now leads to regarding fetuses as having rights of entitlement more valuable than women’s lives.
In Catholicism, women can't be priests. The party line reason for this: If Jesus had wanted women priests, he would have made them. (Of this, another man said, well, since he only made Jewish men priests, ergo, there shouldn't be non-Jewish Catholic priests.) Of course, naturally, only males have the power to absolve anyone of sins! So, if a woman or girl goes to a priest and tells him of her most intimate feelings and urges, if she masturbates or is carrying on an affair, the cleric can vicariously enjoy this secret knowledge. He can also "advise" her on how to handle these matters morally, since he's an expert on the male God's will for her. And all this takes place while refraining from intercourse! So, for women, "Confession" is hardly a "sacrament." Oh no. It's just another exploitation.
The hatred of women and the denials of human rights to them are at the roots of religious dogmas. These are just a few examples. Don't they derive from irrational fears of the power of women over men, and from men ignorant about women? Men who are dedicated to deeply ingrained religious beliefs will never elect a woman to become a head of state. They would sooner vote for a tyrant - preferably a misogynist like their God. All exploitation begins with a "Trust me." Hmm…
Comments
Post a Comment