One of many reasons...

[Evandril]

I hope nobody thinks I'm bashing the Catholic *religion.* No, my problem is with the *institution* behind it.

Why not? I hate how I'm not allowed to call any religion on its cruelty and self-interest no matter what its followers do. No other organization gets that freedom.

They aren't saying you aren't...Just that *they* are not trying to do so with their post. Personally, I've found more I detest about the catholic church than I have about the LDS, and I'd most likely get ridden out of Utah on rails

[Slytovhand]

To me, religion has always been, at its base, a communal excuse to do what its followers were already going to do.
Anyone actually fully following any religion's main books would be arrested, looked on as crazy, and bombared with all the, "That's not what that/he meant." BS.

While I know what you're getting at, for some people it really does make them change the way the see the world - and for the better as well. There really are some 'saints' out there, and it was a religious experience that took them there.

[Talon]

While I know what you're getting at, for some people it really does make them change the way the see the world - and for the better as well. There really are some 'saints' out there, and it was a religious experience that took them there.

Maybe. I'd like to think that such 'saints' are more aligned to the words of G'Kar of B5:

"There is no 'most holy' here. There is only me."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaaWMoSsDVw

[Slytovhand]

Ta'lon... I watched that episode (again - just bought the box set) last night

Gotta love the 'first lesson'.

[anriana]

Women didn't count in those times (and one might feasibly argue that we STILL don't count, in a lot of societies). It's amazing that any mention of women was made at all considering the stories of Deborah and Esther, but then they were probably only granted special status because they were there to - you guessed it - serve the men in some capacity. (Deborah was a prophetess if I'm not mistaken, and her insight was so important that the leader of an Israelite army refused to go into battle without her. Esther was given away in marriage to a king who was hellbent on nailing the Jews; her strategy was able to spare them a death sentence and a traitorous relative got offed instead.)

I don't remember Deborah's story as well, but Esther's whole role was basically "look pretty and do what your uncle tells you," which makes it even worse.

[Sylvia727]

Hmmm, I know there was one woman in the Bible (Ruth, maybe?) who snuck into the enemy's camp and cut off the commander's head. Adam's first wife, Lilith, isn't in the Bible at all, but her story is that she was made from clay, the same as Adam, but refused to submit to him since they were made equal. Adam threw a hissy fit, and she cleared out of the Garden of Eden. Adam's next wife was made from a rib, so that she would be properly submissive and a helpmeet. Lilith went on to sleep with demons, spawn the first vampires (lilin), and try to murder Adam's and Eve's children. So depending on who you ask she's either an evil rebel, the first feminist, or both.

[AFPheonix]

Ruth wasn't involved in any battles. She was a widow who managed to catch the eye of Boaz.

You may be thinking of Jael, who allowed fleeing enemy general Sisera into her tent for refuge. She gave him some warm milk to drink and covered him with a blanket, and when he was asleep, she hammered a tent peg through his temple into the ground under his head.

Yeah, I happen to like the book of Judges, what of it?

[Slytovhand]

Ruth wasn't involved in any battles. She was a widow who managed to catch the eye of Boaz.

You may be thinking of Jael, who allowed fleeing enemy general Sisera into her tent for refuge. She gave him some warm milk to drink and covered him with a blanket, and when he was asleep, she hammered a tent peg through his temple into the ground under his head.

Yeah, I happen to like the book of Judges, what of it?

Was she scorned in any way?? Cos if not, then I'd be really worried when she was...

[AFPheonix]

No, it didn't give much motivation on her part, other than she was sympathetic to the Israelites.
It may have been a move to gain favor with the new up and coming power in the area.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Where in the bible does it forbid abortion? :

I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

However, it's pretty clear on harm to children.

[Boozy]

The Bible doesn't say anything about stem cell research either, but hearing some of these Christians talk about it, you'd think there was an entire book forbidding it.

As technology progresses, many churches find themselves just making up stuff as they go along. Bible v. 2.0 would be helpful.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

However, it's pretty clear on harm to children.

Going back and reading my last post, I realized that it comes across completely different than I intended it to.

What I meant to say was that as far as I know, there is no mention of abortion. So the idea that religious right gets so worked up about that baffles me.

However, the Bible DOES mention that harm to children...and I interpret that to mean children that are running around here and now...is a very, very bad thing.

So for this idiot to excommunicate a whole pack of people for trying to help this little girl, while not even mentioning the rapist, is utterly, utterly inexplicable to me.

I'm a Christian, and I'm a mom, and I believe life is sacred. I am also pro-choice.

[TTAZ]

Hmmm, I know there was one woman in the Bible (Ruth, maybe?) who snuck into the enemy's camp and cut off the commander's head.

I believe you're thinking of Judith slaying Holofernes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holofernes

Holofernes was an Assyrian general who invaded a town, the town almost fell and a Hebrew woman named Judith seduced the general, got him drunk, sliced off his noggin and took it to the home team who then saved the town from the invaders.

[Amethyst Hunter]

What I meant to say was that as far as I know, there is no mention of abortion. So the idea that religious right gets so worked up about that baffles me.

Simply put, it's a wedge issue. Much like gay marriage and other heavily-politicized things, it's used chiefly as a way to divide and conquer. If we're so busy squabbling over this kind of stuff, then we're also supposedly too blind to notice all the other nasty shit they're doing.

It also serves as a way to limit women and confine them to what sexists believe should be a woman's true place: that of subservient. If you have no control over your own body, you're more likely to have more kids that you may or may not want, especially if you've been raised in an environment where it's commonly taught that women have no other purpose other than to serve men and have their children. If you're too busy raising a brood, you're too busy to get any...ideas. And what any religion is always focused on is the numbers game: the more 'followers' you have, the better your chances of 'winning the game', so to speak.

The Biblical verse (among others) they commonly use to justify their anti-abortion stance is that bit about "before you were formed in the womb I knew you" - which, if you read between the lines there, God is explicitly speaking to *one* person, not necessarily the entire human race (though this is of course open for discussion). Same thing as with the whole "go forth and multiply" edict handed to Adam and Eve, who if you subscribe to that doctrine were literally the only two people on the planet, so of course it made sense for them to have a lot of kids if the earth was to be populated.

And on a side note, this is something that puzzles me: if everybody on earth originally came from Adam and Eve, then wouldn't that mean that their kids would've had to resort to...incest, in order to multiply? That's kinda gross, you know?

However, the Bible DOES mention that harm to children...and I interpret that to mean children that are running around here and now...is a very, very bad thing.

That's how I see it. I really believe that if children were taken better care of (and by that I mean never abused, and properly disciplined in basic manners and educated, and most of all truly wanted and loved), there would not be so many problems in the world. (Granted, childrearing is a crapshoot in that even the best parents can wind up having rotten kids through no fault of their own, but still, good parenting counts for a LOT)

It's interesting to note that among the prison hierarchy, child molesters are considered the lowest of the low, and even the worst cons in there - who've done all sorts of atrocities - will vie for a crack at them, possibly even kill them.

So for this idiot to excommunicate a whole pack of people for trying to help this little girl, while not even mentioning the rapist, is utterly, utterly inexplicable to me.

I imagine it's inexplicable to anyone with a) common sense, and b) a heart.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Here's a good site if you're looking at parts of the bible that don't make sense: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ They touch on the "where did the women come from?" bit too. Also, I'm guessing that the following was used as a reason for the atrocity:

Dinah's brothers, to justify the massacre of a town for the rape of their sister, say: "Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?" To the author of Genesis, rape is a crime against the honor of men rather than against a woman. 34:31