Female Anglican deacon rejects ordination

[Imran Siddiqui]

since she supports the assertion that women are to be equal in value to men.

She doesn't.

As Boris said, equality is to have the same oppertunities. What they do with those choices is up to them, but denying them a choice is propagating unequal treatment.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Is that really true? Isn't a woman who prefers to stay at home with her kids considered a sell-out? I've heard that many times from feminists at the university that the career ought to come first, and this is why many feminists have rejected that point of view. Women who choose to stay at home and make babies are not encouraged by feminists to make this choice, they are not extolled as model feminists. Rather, we see the ones who choose their career first, or those who manage to juggle both together. Never have I see them laud a woman who chooses to get married and make babies.

This paragraph is so off-kilter that it doesn't even qualify as a strawman anymore. Rather than even attempt to address what Boris said, you instead went on about what "many feminists" have said, and apparently dismissed or failed to comprehend the fact that Boris is evidently not among these "many feminists."

[Ben Kenobi]

She doesn't.

As Boris said, equality is to have the same oppertunities. What they do with those choices is up to them, but denying them a choice is propagating unequal treatment.

Ah, but men are also not allowed to become nuns. So couldn't one say that they too are denied a choice and that you are propagating unequal treatment?

The problem with your statement is that you are always assuming that unless women can be ordained, they cannot have an equal position in the church. In the workforce that may be true, but the church is quite different, in that there are to be many functions, but one body, each is to be equal to everyone else, regardless of what position they hold.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Ah, but men are also not allowed to become nuns. So couldn't one say that they too are denied a choice and that you are propagating unequal treatment?

They are allowed - they're just called monks then

[Ben Kenobi]

Rather than even attempt to address what Boris said, you instead went on about what "many feminists" have said, and apparently dismissed or failed to comprehend the fact that Boris is evidently not among these "many feminists."

I bolded certain portions of Boris' statement. He says:

Equality for women makes no such demands.

To which I question whether that bold statement is true, from my own experiences with feminists at the university.

Now, loinburger, do you agree with me that feminist organisations at the univerisity do not laud or extoll the woman who chooses to get married, stay and home, and have lots of babies?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
And I really get tired of people saying that I've lost an argument. It gets old fast.

I'd suggest stop losing arguments, then.

Is that really true?

Yes. NOW even says as such:

Homemakers' Rights

NOW actively supports full rights for homemakers and recognition of the economic value of the vital services they perform for family and society.

That hardly seems disparaging of homemakers. The NOW charter also clearly advocates that it's about women having choices, not them being forced to work. Advocating full choices for women includes the choice to be a homemaker. It would be nonsensical to believe otherwise.

Isn't a woman who prefers to stay at home with her kids considered a sell-out?

No. Do you have any offical quotes from mainstream feminist orgs stating this? I've no doubt some radicals have stated it, but it's by no means the majority sentiment, and is in flat contradiction to the stated purposes of such organizations.

Never have I see them laud a woman who chooses to get married and make babies.

Really? Is that why NOW and other feminist organizations are advocating the Homemaker's Bill of Rights, which is meant to fully recognize the vital importance of women who choose to undertake these roles and their contribution to society, as well as the economy?

You haven't a clue.

Now, the woman here is making a distinction between the workforce, and between the church. The question we should be asking here is why. I think the key is in the statements about there being a 'glass ceiling' in the church. How is a church different from a business? Is the sole model of leadership in the church found in the pulpit?

I could care less about what a church does, honestly, but you broadened the scope beyond simple church dogma to society at large on page 1. That's wherein my critique lies.

[Ben Kenobi]

They are allowed - they're just called monks then

Suppose I like living in a convent with other women? That's the other point that comes up, do monks and nuns perform the same function in the church? One of the things that I see, is that they choose to do different things. The monks and nuns don't end up performing the same role, they choose to do different things.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Now, loinburger, do you agree with me that feminist organisations at the univerisity do not laud or extoll the woman who chooses to get married, stay and home, and have lots of babies?

No.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
To which I question whether that bold statement is true, from my own experiences with feminists at the university.

Which is still irrelevant, since my statement wasn't based on what feminists were saying, anyway, but rather what actual equality means. I was not purporting to be giving the opinion of feminists at that point.

Even so, your generalization was flat-out wrong, as I already posted.

[Imran Siddiqui]

but men are also not allowed to become nuns. So couldn't one say that they too are denied a choice and that you are propagating unequal treatment?

There is monastaries that perform the same role, but if there wasn't, then yes, it'd be unequal treatment.

The problem with your statement is that you are always assuming that unless women can be ordained, they cannot have an equal position in the church. In the workforce that may be true, but the church is quite different, in that there are to be many functions, but one body, each is to be equal to everyone else, regardless of what position they hold.

If they don't even have the oppertunity to be ordained, then NO, they can't have equal position in the Church. The author is wrong, there IS a glass ceiling. It was born out of a time where the religion was strongly mysogynistic (one of Joan of Arc's "crimes" was that she dressed like a man and did things that men were supposed to do).

And since you are a Catholic now, you should stop spouting Protestant dogma . Everybody isn't equal in the position they hold in the Church. This isn't Calvinism. The Priest, the Bishop, the Pope are far more important in the corporal body of the Church than the lay person... even after Vatican II.

And this 'each is equal regardless to their position' is nonsense. It's the same justification for the Hindu caste system. Oh, each person is equal in the eyes of Vishnu, but they have their own position that they must stay in and their position is dicatated by the Gods and the karma you have undertaken.

[Boris Godunov]

Psst...Imran...It's "opportunity."

[St Leo]

I agree with Ben's article. Bowdlerizing Christianity to make it appear less monstrous is a misguided task. As time passes, it becomes ever more apparent that all religion is a lie, an evil, and an abomination. It's in our interests for religions to stalwartly embrace all that was bad about the past.

Encouraging reform within a religion hurts the average adherent by making an unconversion to atheism less probable. We want religions to fall on their own swords.

If we permit religions to devise new lies to replace their old lies, the time until their final demise will grow intolerably long. Christianity is sexist. Christianity is mysogynistic. It cannot change. This must not be obscured, for it may prove to be the nail in its coffin.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Suppose I like living in a convent with other women?

Join the Ordo Sancti Salvatoris.

(Yes, I know they don't have any dual-sex convents any more, but far as I know the Rule still allows for it.)

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov



And the first article is not very scientific--mostly speculation. But he raises some interesting points, if he does engage in very questionable hyperbole.

Ok, I understand what the OP is about.

But I still laughed when I read the first linked article you're referring to.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
And I really get tired of people saying that I've lost an argument. It gets old fast.

And the reason you haven't responded to my analogy with white slaveowners' argument in one of my posts, is because deep down, you know you would lose that argument as well.