So how long will Ben last this time?

[Ben Kenobi]

I didn't specify a timeframe. There are many instances of royal incestuous relationships throughout history.

Not in Europe. You are aware that for most of medieval Europe that the Pope forbade anything more than 4th order consanguinity?

routinely blighted the world with is your ideal government

Constitutional monarchy is not a bad form of government. My ideal government would have a mixture of what Canada has, and what the US has, with an elected Senate with equal regional representation, and an elected House of Commons, followed with the Queen of the head of state, and defender of the Catholic Faith. I hope that one day I'll live to see that.

[Kidlicious]

Uh, I was a protestant.



I stated that you despise the Theotokos and claim that we worship her. I did not accuse you of thinking that women are inferior, but rather, that there is nothing special about women and that men and women are no different. This is contrary to what scripture teaches that men and women are unique. This is a good thing. Catholics believe that women have special graces and men have special graces and that these God-given graces ought to be cultivated, not denied.



No, sir. I am right about this. I was a Protestant.

It doesn't matter that you were a protestant. You're a damn liar!

Furthermore, no protestants believe that women aren't different you lying *******!

[Ben Kenobi]

And it doesn't matter what gender they are. Did Christ not say in Heaven there are neither male or female?

.

[Ben Kenobi]

You clearly said that women are superior.

Where?

You said you would have no reason to live without women.

Indeed I did. For they brought me into this world.

You said you believe in your religion because women brought you to it. You have a serious problem. God does not favor women.

Then why is Mary called, most blessed?

[Kidlicious]

You clearly said that women are superior. You said you would have no reason to live without women. You said you believe in your religion because women brought you to it. You have a serious problem. God does not favor women.

[NICE MOBIUS]

What part of 'blanket statement' don't you understand!?

Concentrating exclusively on women staying at home to look after children younger than school age, I imagine many would if that was their choice. I think it is obvious that in an optimum scenario that one parent was able to look after their children at home at least until school age, but that their careers shouldn't necessarily be penalised for doing so. Hence why so many European countries have the sorts of commie socialist childcare options that would be anathema to cold-hearted capitalists like you.

The point is that you didn't make that distinction, you implied that women would be happy being stay at home housewives whether there were children or not. I imagine if, god forbid, you got married, you'd be happy coming home to a cooked meal after work and all the household chores done for you except the 'man stuff'...

Any parent wants what's best for their child. Personally I believe that an optimum scenario if affordable by the parents is for at least one of them to be able to stay at home bringing up the child at least until he or she is of school age. The major difference with you is that I make no distinction whether that is the mother or the father.

You need to think in less sexist terms.

What's wrong, Ben, my post doesn't warrant a response?

I shall assume that's a tacit admission that I am right... and you need to buck up your ideas about women...

[Kidlicious]

Horsey, what do you say about this crap BK is spewing. I can't believe that anyone else believed that crap. He's lying about protestantism. I can tell you that much.

[Aeson]

Arguments can be rational and still wrong, Aeson. Arguments can be irrational and correct.

We are specifically talking about racism and misogyny. Racism is irrational. Misogyny is irrational.

You think they are rational. That's part of why I say you are racist and misogynist ... the other reasons being the many instances of you expressing yourself in racist and misogynist ways.

[Ben Kenobi]

Concentrating exclusively on women staying at home to look after children younger than school age, I imagine many would if that was their choice.

So do I. That has been my experience over the years.

I think it is obvious that in an optimum scenario that one parent was able to look after their children at home at least until school age, but that their careers shouldn't necessarily be penalised for doing so. Hence why so many European countries have the sorts of commie socialist childcare options that would be anathema to cold-hearted capitalists like you.

Mhmm, this cold-hearted capitalist has done his share of child-minding. I have no problem with capitalist childcare options. It's a free country. I have a problem with state-sponsored ones. If a woman wants to work and put her children in daycare, she should be free to do so, if she's willing to pay the person to watch her children. It should not be my responsibility to pay for her child care.

The point is that you didn't make that distinction, you implied that women would be happy being stay at home housewives whether there were children or not. I imagine if, god forbid, you got married, you'd be happy coming home to a cooked meal after work and all the household chores done for you except the 'man stuff'...

Yes, I would be very happy with that life, which is why I look for women that want this life.

All I said is that there are many women who do want this, I said nothing about most and nothing about all.

Any parent wants what's best for their child. Personally I believe that an optimum scenario if affordable by the parents is for at least one of them to be able to stay at home bringing up the child at least until he or she is of school age. The major difference with you is that I make no distinction whether that is the mother or the father.

I find it ironic that you cite this at me of all people.

You need to think in less sexist terms.

I find your post very amusing.

[Kidlicious]

Wow. I didn't realize that Emma Watson is Catholic. How come you never talk about her BK?

http://lifeteen.com/blog/jesus-femin...nder-equality/

Jesus was a feminist

[Aeson]

Not in Europe. You are aware that for most of medieval Europe that the Pope forbade anything more than 4th order consanguinity?

There are many instances of royal incestuous relationships.

Constitutional monarchy is not a bad form of government. My ideal government would have a mixture of what Canada has, and what the US has, with an elected Senate with equal regional representation, and an elected House of Commons, followed with the Queen of the head of state, and defender of the Catholic Faith. I hope that one day I'll live to see that.

Some people buy Powerball tickets ... others move to Texas hoping to be ruled by a Catholic queen. The first are much more realistic than the second

[Kidlicious]

How BK sees himself.

[Ben Kenobi]

We are specifically talking about racism and misogyny. Racism is irrational. Misogyny is irrational.

People do things because they have a reason behind it.

Slavery happened because certain people wanted to get the benefit of other people's labor.
Welfare happened because certain people wanted to get the benefit of other people's labor.

That slavery was of black people in the united states, does not preclude slavery of white people in other parts of the world. I don't think slavery is primarily motivated by a racial desire, less so the same desire that has always been to enslave other people. It just happened in the US that it was black people enslaved by White folks.

I don't believe that black people are less moral than white people, that black people are less capable of understanding things. There are many racial sentiments in the era which state the opposite, ranking races on a hierarchy with the black folks at the bottom. I can understand the rational desire for any one race to put themselves on the top of the pie, as it is a form of self-aggrandizement to say that I am superior because I am white, etc.

I don't believe that the statistics bear this out. Everything I have seen shows that there are greater differences within a race than between a race. This is simple statistics. Ergo, I don't believe that treating races differently as a whole has any basis in reason. I agree with you here.

However, where we disagree is over the issue of culture. I think a society has a right to protect their culture, be it Filipino, etc. And that we have no right to say to the Filipinos that they should leave the Philippines. I don't make an exception for the United States. I don't agree with a set quota for immigration, but I do believe that the US has the right to screen and select those that they believe will contribute to the nation and assimilate within the culture of the United States.

I don't see the desires of the 1790 fledgling United States to control their immigration as an irrational desire, especially given the issues between language and culture. I see it as odious that at the same time they would not admit them as citizens, that they would take them as slaves. This was wrong then and wrong now. If you do not want them to come over as free men, then you should not be bringing them over as slaves. Had the US made the right decisions out of the gate, much bloodshed would have been averted.

As for misogyny, again, it depends on how you define it. Men and women are logically different in many different areas of life. We should not treat men and women exactly equal because they are not. I would be sympathetic to paying women more for their work, given their different circumstances in life.

[Kidlicious]

[Ben Kenobi]

Wow. I didn't realize that Emma Watson is Catholic. How come you never talk about her BK?

If the pieces don't fit then there's probably something wrong with your logic. God is a man, the bible is clear on that. Jesus is a man, the bible is clear on that Ephesians 5 is clear, that men have the responsibility of headship within their families.

Does this mean that men and women are not equal in value? No. What it means is that equality of function is not equality of value. We are not equal because we can do the same things, we are equal because we are persons in the eyes of God.

How BK sees himself.

Other than not being an Evangelical, and other than having a completely different theology you've got it spot on, mate. Good job.