And when that home is harem of king?
And when husnand was away of trip.
Women did have significant political influence in any know society. Just because it's indirect it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Yes, there is a movement to take away women’s right to vote
- Thread starter MeganC
- Start date
And when husnand was away of trip.
Women did have significant political influence in any know society. Just because it's indirect it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
If goal is for vote to lose votethen you should also add any retiree, public servant, soldier, public school teacher.
These are all people who have reason to vote for more taxes because money will finish in their pockets.
To generalize, voting body should consist of one most interested into good of all, not votes voting for benefit of themselves.
Also, some situation to benefit from wisdom of crowds.
These are all people who have reason to vote for more taxes because money will finish in their pockets.
To generalize, voting body should consist of one most interested into good of all, not votes voting for benefit of themselves.
Also, some situation to benefit from wisdom of crowds.
I mostly see post hoc, cum hoc, and category shift fallacies supporting the claims that women shouldn't vote.
I find it interesting that many of us are quick to blame women as if they are they problem with this country (which is fairly ridiculous), but if patriarchs truly think of men as the leaders of the country/church/family unit (which I fully support), then shouldn't we realize that the greater gender despearency is the the failure of masculinity rather than femininity?
After all, the fall of Man did not actually occur when Eve ate the fruit, but when Adam followed his wife into doing so. Immediately after Adam eat of the fruit is when they both realized that they were naked. This is significant because adam, as the one responsible for his mate, theoretically could have annulled the decision that you had made per Numbers 30:3-13), but instead he failed in his role, submitted to sin, and the responsibility was on his shoulders for the fall of humanity. This view is reaffirmed in Romans 5:12 that Adam was indeed ultimately responsible for the curse on humanity.
This is exactly what is happening today. Saying that our country is failing because of feminism is actually a cop out- as men, we need to realize that our country is failing because of a lack of (biblical) masculinity. We are the ones responsible, we are the one who take the blame. It's literally our role to take the blame.
I am not contending that women should be in any form of significant political power- I am somewhat undecided on that, but leaning towards no. I am simply contending that women should be on equal voting terms as men.
Voting is a symbol of something in this country. It has come to symbolize the recognition of common validity and equal value we have as human beings, which is clearly supported in the bible (per being made in the image of God, co-heisr with Christ, etc. ) If we lived in a society where men were truly living up to the biblical standards they are supposed to be upholding, and loving and leading their wives as they're supposed to be, perhaps women wouldn't care if they voted or not- who's to say. But now, to say that women cannot vote in the society, does strongly indicate that you do not think that women are of equal inherent value as men (generally speaking).
As far as the "image of God thing" goes, in Genesis it is closely stated "in the image of God he created them male and female he created them", indicating that they are both indeed made in the image of God. However, per First Corinthians 11, it is clear that there is a hierarchy to that image. I think it is reasonable to say that man is closer to the image of god, and women are in the image of God through man, but I believe that this is a picture of hierarchy rather than greater/lesser value.
I never thought about the possibility of the "feminine leaving Adam" through his rib, but that is very interesting thought. I personally don't think it holds much weight as this idea is never stated in the bible: however, it is something to ponder.
I find it interesting that many of us are quick to blame women as if they are they problem with this country (which is fairly ridiculous), but if patriarchs truly think of men as the leaders of the country/church/family unit (which I fully support), then shouldn't we realize that the greater gender despearency is the the failure of masculinity rather than femininity?
After all, the fall of Man did not actually occur when Eve ate the fruit, but when Adam followed his wife into doing so. Immediately after Adam eat of the fruit is when they both realized that they were naked. This is significant because adam, as the one responsible for his mate, theoretically could have annulled the decision that you had made per Numbers 30:3-13), but instead he failed in his role, submitted to sin, and the responsibility was on his shoulders for the fall of humanity. This view is reaffirmed in Romans 5:12 that Adam was indeed ultimately responsible for the curse on humanity.
This is exactly what is happening today. Saying that our country is failing because of feminism is actually a cop out- as men, we need to realize that our country is failing because of a lack of (biblical) masculinity. We are the ones responsible, we are the one who take the blame. It's literally our role to take the blame.
I am not contending that women should be in any form of significant political power- I am somewhat undecided on that, but leaning towards no. I am simply contending that women should be on equal voting terms as men.
Voting is a symbol of something in this country. It has come to symbolize the recognition of common validity and equal value we have as human beings, which is clearly supported in the bible (per being made in the image of God, co-heisr with Christ, etc. ) If we lived in a society where men were truly living up to the biblical standards they are supposed to be upholding, and loving and leading their wives as they're supposed to be, perhaps women wouldn't care if they voted or not- who's to say. But now, to say that women cannot vote in the society, does strongly indicate that you do not think that women are of equal inherent value as men (generally speaking).
As far as the "image of God thing" goes, in Genesis it is closely stated "in the image of God he created them male and female he created them", indicating that they are both indeed made in the image of God. However, per First Corinthians 11, it is clear that there is a hierarchy to that image. I think it is reasonable to say that man is closer to the image of god, and women are in the image of God through man, but I believe that this is a picture of hierarchy rather than greater/lesser value.
I never thought about the possibility of the "feminine leaving Adam" through his rib, but that is very interesting thought. I personally don't think it holds much weight as this idea is never stated in the bible: however, it is something to ponder.
I don't mean to downplay the toxicity of feminism- just simply to point out the greater lack of biblical masculinity.
Genesis 5:1
This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day when God created man, He made him in the image of God.
The woman came from the man.
1 Cor 11:7
A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
Given my druthers I would be Quite restrictive.
I don't see the overwhelming majority as qualified or remotely interested enough to become qualified. Plenty don't have the capacity to get to the level I would advocate for being the minimum.
Meritocracy for the win.
I see your point and I don’t disagree.
The qualification that I had put on was that they were supporting their husband’s views. The process would have to be well managed.
I don’t believe that we get to choose that form of government until Yeshuah returns.Voting/democracy is unbiblical. Women shouldn't have the vote and neither should men. Once we have the totalitarian dictatorship of The King we'll have righteous government, not until. However, many are going to be very unhappy when that happens.
You make some great points in your post. Yes, we are guilty of victimthink--rather than complaining about what women do we men must do our duty.
In your statement above though, you are confused. Competence to vote is the antithesis of equal value! If we refuse to value someone because of their intellect, gender, financial state, family, religion, ideas-- how is letting them all vote somehow even the playing field or bestow status or value?
I believe that the Creator put immense value in everyone. He also placed boundaries on roles and decisionmaking. If we all have no distinctness, why does the enemy of our souls work so intensely to establish our supposed "equality" ?
Last edited:
Precisely, which is what I'm looking forward to.
I think I see what you are saying, and I do agree that we have "distinctness"- i.e perhaps some ARE more competent to vote than others, but if we limit or judge who does and does not get to vote, that its a steep slope towards "fleshly" totalitarian control. The point of Democracy is to level the playing field and determine leaders according to popular consensus (sort of), right? So I don't think that voters get to chose who does and doesn't vote, it ought to be a level playing field.
Buuuuut, you all make a great point. Democracy is actually not the government of heaven- totalitarian monarchy with the Godhead at the top IS the ideal. BUT we were tasked with ruling the earth until then- and totalitarian control has proved to not work in the hands of humans- even Yahweh tried to keep the Israelites from this by setting up the system of Judges (which at least one of them, Interestingly enough for this conversation was, in fact, a woman- Deborah), but he eventually conceded to allowing a monarchy even though that was not what he wanted for them.
I dont really know what the conclusion of what I just said is, except that to do Democracy right, we don't get to chose who does and doesn't vote. We all get a say, and that say is protected.
By this same logic some of y'all are using, the left could just as easily deem us "incompetent voters"- and what if we lose the ability to vote because they decide thats what's best for the country? No, for Democracy (albeit with all of its flaws) to work, we need to allow everyone the ability to vote non-discriminatorily (pretty sure that's not a word).
This being said, if families were truly practicing biblical headship and gender roles, there wouldn't really be that much discrepancy between male and female votes... Just saying.
And if everyone did things right, totalitarianism would work.
Not to be finicky, but you sound like those who talk out both sides of their mouth.
If everyone can vote, then the voting will cover everything. If everything is voted on, then at some point there will be discusiion, if not voting, on who can vote: all genders? All religions? All nationalities? All people, regardless of whether they are connected with our country-- you will eventually have meaninglessness and ruin. There have to be limits of some kind. It makes sense to start with them. And it makes sense to approach them with questions: What sort of thing are we trying to create? What is it supposed to achieve? And along in there you will have to make far-reaching decisions: Is the fundamental building block and idea? An individual? A family? Something else?
Bottom line is, many of the people voting today have very different objectives, mindset, and background than the founding fathers had. That goes for every nation and practically every established entity. Most will lose more in their voting than they will ever know existed. But as long as it is just what the people say they want, we can engineer ANYTHING and call it Democracy.
You have to make individual because only individuals can act, even when they are part of collective.
But pretending collective groups like families don't matter is utter foolishness.
12As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.
YHWH doesn’t seem to have a very good view of women ruling. Voting is the ground floor of ruling.
How would you reconcile your view with His?
And how women voting leads to rule of women over men? Btw, there are slighty more men are women, so men aren't outvoted.
If women rule over men, then this is consequnces of legal system. Any no way all aspects of legal system are caused by political system.
Not all males vote like men.
So if the women were to vote with the males who were being squishes, they would overrule the actual men.
It happens an awful lot.
Would you mind clarifying on how you see me doing this? I would just like to understand so that I can avoid it.
I see what you are saying, that is a good point. Yes, of course we have to have limits- we wouldn't let a baby vote
I'm not going to lay out what I personally think all the qualifications are for determining who gets to vote: all I'm advocating for is that maintaining women's right to vote is more in line with a gospel mentality than taking it away, and that to take it away at this point in the game would be to making a largely unethical statement.
Not that measures should not be taken to reestablish biblical patriarchy within the family and society: but to take away women's right to vote would be an overreach.