I JUST GOT DIVORCED AND MY DAUGHTER IS QUEER!!!

[Lalanae]

People work out marriage on their own terms. It's between the two people how they want to handle things.

The bible simply provides a proven example that if done right, provides a loving, equitable and mutually elevating environment for both partners.

If the guy is treating his wife like some kind of second class servent he is doing wrong according to biblical teaching. He should be treating his wife better than himself.

It's a mutally balancing equation.

Sure its between two people. It still doesn't make it right. You are dancing around the crux of the issue like every other Christian who purports this kind of philosophy. You still see the man in a superior position in the household. A husband treating his wife "better than himself" so he can have the final say in household decisions is NOT equal.

And wtf does that mean "treating his wife better than himself" beyond a bunch of hot air designed to make women THINK somehow they are getting something in return for their subserviance? LOVING someone is about wanting to treat the other person better than yourself. Both parties should be doing that anyway.

[Jice Virago]

I'm sure all forms of second class citezenship, like sexism, slavery, and segragatiion, all worked pretty well too..... until the second class people got fed up with getting the shit end of the stick. The biblical model of marriage only works, long term, when the people involve ignore parts of it selectively or one/both of them are so brainwashed into the Cult of the Crispie that their lives are pretty vapid anyhow.

[Adex_Xeda]

The guy is an equal partner in a marriage not a superior. The minute he starts acting like he's superior, he's screwing up.

If you love someone, you don't go off and make some family affecting decision without winning your partner's endorsement.

You make family affecting decisions that pleases your partner and that you both agree on because you love them.

[Thess]

Adex is enjoying the hole he is digging apparently

[Adex_Xeda]

I'm failing to communicate.

The outside world has told you guys so many wrong things about the bible that it's hard to crack the shell of hardened misinformation.

[Lalanae]

The guy is an equal partner in a marriage not a superior. The minute he starts acting like he's superior, he's screwing up.

If you love someone, you don't go off and make some family affecting decision without winning your partner's endorsement.

You make family affecting decisions that pleases your partner and that you both agree on because you love them.

a leader (your words), a superior, same difference. They are in a position of authority over another person.

[Thess]

Okay - I've opened a bible before, and considering I went to catholic highschool - I've read most of it.

I'll take the first 'story' in the bible for example.

And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof: 2:22 and the rib, which Jehovah God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 2:23 And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Okay so you are telling me women were made out of a Adams rib, and this isn't at all implied that women are 'less' then men?

3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden? 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: 3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. 3:8 And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden.

Okay now a snake apparently is talking to Eve, and Eve gets them kicked out of the garden for her actions - this is not sexist?

I realise I am quoting from the old testiment here, but this is the story I read when I first open a bible.

[Karae]

I'm failing to communicate.

The outside world has told you guys so many wrong things about the bible that it's hard to crack the shell of hardened misinformation.

You're the one that's brainwashed. I've read the Bible myself and arrived at my own conclusions, entirely independent of outside influence. I've never been lectured by anyone about religion. Your interpretation of it is polluted by your parent's and church's influence.

You're not failing to communicate - you're just too honest a person to straight up lie, and as a result are, in fact, revealing the innate sexism in major religion. Despite your desire to prove me wrong, you're actually proving me right.

[Jice Virago]

How about, I have read the fucking thing from cover to cover at least seven times in my lifetime (which is seven times more than most people who like to thump it) and can see the plainly obvious?

[masteen]

3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden? 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: 3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. 3:8 And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden.

Okay now a snake apparently is talking to Eve, and Eve gets them kicked out of the garden for her actions - this is not sexist?

I realise I am quoting from the old testiment here, but this is the story I read when I first open a bible.

Actually, one of my old philosophy profs believed that this was one of the few empowering stories of women in the Bible. Eve expands human consciousness beyond what our creator had made for us. She gives us knowledge of good and evil, and consequently, gives us free will.

[Lalanae]

3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden? 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: 3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. 3:8 And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden.

Okay now a snake apparently is talking to Eve, and Eve gets them kicked out of the garden for her actions - this is not sexist?

I realise I am quoting from the old testiment here, but this is the story I read when I first open a bible.

Actually, one of my old philosophy profs believed that this was one of the few empowering stories of women in the Bible. Eve expands human consciousness beyond what our creator had made for us. She gives us knowledge of good and evil, and consequently, gives us free will.

Thats a spin if I ever heard one.

It would be one thing if she was portrayed to *know* that she was "expanding human consciousness" but she is portrayed as easily decieved, greedy, and disloyal. Adam on the other hand knows what she has done is wrong and does it because he loves her (hello jesus/martyr type!). She is pretty clueless and trying to apply heroic attributes to her is ridiculous.

[Adex_Xeda]

The bible reports that Eve made a bad choice, and that is in some manner sexist? If anything it highlights an individual's choice and consequence.

[Karae]

The bible reports that Eve made a bad choice, and that is in some manner sexist? If anything it highlights an individual's choice and consequence.

Uh, you're omitting the fact that the Bible claims that all women are descended of Eve and, therefore, share all of her faults. By saying that Eve was easily deceived, greedy, disloyal, and a prone to a multitude of other sins the Bible is saying that *all* women are and, as a consequence, shouldn't be trusted to make a decision.

[Lalanae]

The bible reports that Eve made a bad choice, and that is in some manner sexist? If anything it highlights an individual's choice and consequence.

Uh, you're omitting the fact that the Bible claims that all women are descended of Eve and, therefore, share all of her faults. By saying that Eve was easily deceived, greedy, disloyal, and a prone to a multitude of other sins the Bible is saying that *all* women are and, as a consequence, shouldn't be trusted to make a decision.

Don't forget that the bible also explains menstruation and pain in child birth as punishment on women as a reminder of the sin of Eve. Its clear that the writers of the Original Sin myth intended Adam and Eve to represent their respective genders.

[Adex_Xeda]

Okay so you are telling me women were made out of a Adams rib, and this isn't at all implied that women are 'less' then men?

It describes a sequence of events. You have to bring in something from an outside the story interpret it as a definition of gender hierachy.



I do know what you guys are trying to say. (I think) Old jewish customs had a way of bringing marriage and women into some funky property realm, where the woman's main function was to have children and support the family. But if you look at the words of Jesus and Paul you'll see that God's ideal was for an equal relationship where each person complemented supported each other through mutual love and respect.

You must also consider that the bible addresses issues that may not be the appropriate for a country's laws to address. It's allowable for God to spell out the best way to have a rock solid marriage in the bible. It is not allowable for a nation's laws to tightly specify roles in a marriage. That infringes on personal freedom. (Granted there are a few specifications such as parents are charged by law to be responsible with this children and help them grow. )

[Voronwë]

so are you trying to say that for a female to have a Christian marriage she actually has to surrender at least in part some of her Constitutional rights?
(not officially to the government, but in effect).


i'd love to see the Pope himself tell that to my hard core Irish Catholic mother-in-law, hehe

i would pay for his flight over from Rome for that

[Adex_Xeda]

I don't say that Voronwe. A biblical marriage equally sustains both partners.

If the biblical model is followed by both partners, the marriage becomes a tight union of both of their desires, goals, and freedoms. If properly followed they both spend their time mutually loving and respecting each other.

For example, my mother always had a dream of being painter. My father took on two jobs so that my mother could stop work and pursue her dream. He loved her and did everything he could to build her up. In return she has repeatedly done all in her power to support him and love him in return.

Another example, my father had a great work opportunity 400 miles from the nearest relative. My mother sacrificed being close to both sides of the family because she wanted my father to have a chance. After a while my grandparents started needing attention. My father because he loved my mother, sacrificed that job so that they could move back close to my mother's mother so she could take care of her.

Two people living for the other person. Their life has been a union of their shared goals and dreams. Their big decisions have been in consensus, because they respect each other's wants and desires.

When I look at them I do not see one dominating the other. For 32 years, their life has been a shared fusion of two individuals' needs and dreams.

The biblical formula is a self balancing equation when it comes to partners' equality.

[Rekaar.]

Are any of you that claim marriages should be a partnership in which neither person has the authority to make a final decision business owners, or in some sort of outside sales position, that requires you meet with "decision makers" to make your living?

Long sentence sorry! Point though is that no matter what you're talking about, in any working relationship be it a marriage or a business it always comes down to one person who makes the final decision. There is only one leader, one head, one decision maker. Ever. I can say that with confidence because if I didn't know it I would starve by trying to gain new clients by talking to their secretaries (or other people that don't make the call).

The Bible tells its followers that it is the man's duty to lead his household. Someone has to be in charge. What criteria would you put in place other than gender that would transcend the millenia? Right or wrong in your mind, I believe it is my job (not my right, not my priviledge - my job) to be President and CEO of my family.

Does that mean I don't value my wife's input? Does that mean I look down on her? Does that mean I think I'm better than her?

The crux of the argument, as someone mentioned above, is this. Anything with 2 heads is in the circus. If you think your atheist parents are each head of the house then, while quite skeptical over the reality of the situation (having met many thousands of couples in my life and never seen it), most of the time when somene claims this it's the woman that makes the decisions in the family. I'm not claiming that's right or wrong. Just speaking from experience.

I have never met your parents and won't comment further on them. I'm sure they're wonderful people and I hope they're every bit as happy as you claim.

[Jice Virago]

Deciding it on gender is sexism. This point cannot be disputed, it is fact.

If the church actually encouraged intelligent thought, it would recommend that the smartest person be the final arbitor of family decissions. It didn't. Instead an institution dominated by men, unsuprisingly, mandates that you must have a penis to have the last word in your house. That is how it is. If a female pope decreed that this is how it is it would still be a sexist policy.

I suppose your next going to argue that sexism is acceptable in cases of leadership? Or maybe just as they pertain to christians?

[Voronwë]

Rek, that is a valid point, sometimes somebody has to make the decision.

in my marriage, sometimes that person is me. and sometimes that person is my wife. i don't see that it needs to be one person for all things at all. Personally, our lives are too complex for either of us to be 100% on top of all the things we need to be, so some things i happily defer to her on, and some things, she happily defers to me on.

i'm certainly not trying to say that i have the model marriage, but i also certainly have no intention of having a reporting structure in my marriage either =). my wife works in the corporate world and sometimes unintentionally, she'll still be in that mode arriving home from work. i have said "honey i don't work for you" a couple of times

at any rate, i certainly am not trying to suggest the new testament verses are the really ridiculous stuff (that i can think of)>

i think it is Ecclesiastes (sp.) where there is a paragraph describing the ideal wife. Some passage like: Luckiest of all is the man who has a silent wife.

while this is probably the truest thing ever written in the bible, it is sexist as hell

[Karae]

Are any of you that claim marriages should be a partnership in which neither person has the authority to make a final decision business owners, or in some sort of outside sales position, that requires you meet with "decision makers" to make your living?

Long sentence sorry! Point though is that no matter what you're talking about, in any working relationship be it a marriage or a business it always comes down to one person who makes the final decision. There is only one leader, one head, one decision maker. Ever. I can say that with confidence because if I didn't know it I would starve by trying to gain new clients by talking to their secretaries (or other people that don't make the call).

I used to work in a sales position dealing with small business owners several times a day. I agree with your sales technique, it isn't wise to waste your time on non-decision-makers or even companies run by committee, but it's not applicable to marriage. A marriage can function very efficiently as a committee - most successful businesses aren't structured that way. It's very easy for couples to consult one another and make major decisions together. Simple decisions (example: buying a pair of socks) can be made autonomously, by either partner, but major decisions should be made together.

That means that *gasp* you might have to compromise instead of the man "putting his foot down."

To answer your questions - No, it just means you don't value her input as much as your own opinion. Yes, you look down on her. Yes, you think you're better than her. You don't think she's qualified to be the President and CEO of your family.

An equal relationship means exactly that. It doesn't mean one person is making life-altering decisions for the other like they are a superior/subordinate business relationship. It means you compromise so both of you are happy instead of one of you "putting your foot down."

[Rasspotari]

1.9 out of every 1000 get divorced here.. ya'll need to learn the difference between finding a wife/husband and beeing horny.

pudr

[Rekaar.]

There is no such thing as making a decision together. That's not reality. In every situation either the two already agree or one must convince the other. In each situation, it rests on the final approval of one person. Depending on your position you will either plead your case seeking approval or plead your case seeking affirmation.

And karae, I'm either not communicating the reality of my situation or there is some other barrier preventing it from getting through. I wonder what kind of leadership training you've had but this doesn't need to turn into a career dockett debate =p

Basically though, if I'm paraphrasing you correctly, you claim that to be in a leadership position you must then inherently believe yourself to be better in every way than those you lead. I don't deny that by far the majority of people in middle management positions behave that way. There's a world of difference between management and leadership though. Maybe we're talking about two different things after all?

[kyoukan]

Are any of you that claim marriages should be a partnership in which neither person has the authority to make a final decision business owners, or in some sort of outside sales position, that requires you meet with "decision makers" to make your living?

have you ever been married?

[Voronwë]

i dont think the business model is a good fit with a marriage.

i think it is excellent for EQ guilds though =)

[kyoukan]

I would say that the business model for a marriage is a recipe for a dysfunctional one. marriage is a partnership. if there is a dominant person making the majority of the important decisions then eventually the other person is going to begrudge it and probably seek independence by other means. I've seen marriages where the man is dominant ones where the woman is dominant and neither are too healthy.

no major decision has been made in my marriage without either mutual consent or some form of compromise.

[Rekaar.]

I guess it's hard point to make because it's such a fine line. I'm agreeing with you but I take it one step further. I'm saying that absolutely you take input from your partner. But what I'm also saying is that it really always comes down to the decision of one of you, and the other goes along with it willingly even if the decision goes against what said partner wanted... The thing is, disagreements happen. The fine line comes in where, as the decision maker, did you do an adequate job of hearing your partner out before making the decision or did you not even pay any attention to their view.

Think about it, if you feel you've been heard are you pretty accepting of whatever decision is made after you've had your say? You're doing a poor job if you're not listening but what I'm saying is that regardless of how good the communication in a marriage is, only one person truly has the final say. It is the same in any "partnership." Does that make any more sense?

Oh and yes, I am happily married

[Thess]

Oh and yes, I am happily married

From that response, I doubt your wife is. The term patronizing comes to mind.

[Karae]

There is no such thing as making a decision together. That's not reality. In every situation either the two already agree or one must convince the other. In each situation, it rests on the final approval of one person. Depending on your position you will either plead your case seeking approval or plead your case seeking affirmation.

And karae, I'm either not communicating the reality of my situation or there is some other barrier preventing it from getting through. I wonder what kind of leadership training you've had but this doesn't need to turn into a career dockett debate =p

Basically though, if I'm paraphrasing you correctly, you claim that to be in a leadership position you must then inherently believe yourself to be better in every way than those you lead. I don't deny that by far the majority of people in middle management positions behave that way. There's a world of difference between management and leadership though. Maybe we're talking about two different things after all?

com·pro·mise Audio pronunciation of "compromise" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kmpr-mz)
n.

1.
1. A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions.
2. The result of such a settlement.


You're communicating the reality of your situation perfectly. You've made the decision before you ever communicate with your wife. You said it yourself, "Depending on your position you will either plead your case seeking approval or plead your case seeking affirmation." You don't believe in compromise, of course it's largely irrelevant because from you've described she's not involved in the decision making process at all - you merely inform her of the decision and brow beat her into agreement.

Personally, I am not married, but I am in a committed relationship. I love Thess very much and I could never make a major decision for her. I don't think I could ever recover from the guilt (or the groin kick) if we didn't arrive at the decision together after discussion and compromise.

You don't seem to realize marriage, or any relationship for that matter, is about give and take. I have a sinking suspicion that the first decision your wife makes in the marriage will be to divorce you.

Of course, I could just be posting this to because I can't get away with posting the kind of chauvinistic doublespeak you have since my significant other will actually read it. (kidding, Joy)

[Drasta]

just accept it people .... GOD is the root of all evil in the world ... he is the only reason we have massive bloody conflicts, because he preaches hate and intalerance(sp).

[Winnow]

just accept it people .... GOD is the root of all evil in the world ... he is the only reason we have massive bloody conflicts, because he preaches hate and intalerance(sp).

Drasta gets it. Why is that so hard for most people to understand? All you have to do is some research to understand this basic point. (I'd change the wording to state, belief in a GOD though not GOD as there is no such thing!)

There was peace in the roman empire for so long because they were pagans and had so many gods to pick from that everyone could find a cool one so all were happy. Christians screwed that up. Before them, if there was a dispute, you'd drink some wine, kill a goat* and all would be fine again.

We need cooler gods. I'm not talking about trying to make the current ones appear cool to worship like christian rock groups do for example. That's not cool. We need brand new gods with some flare.

*maybe sacrafice a virgin once in awhile

[Voronwë]

Gods are just projections of what we socially define our tribes to be.

gods don't start wars, mostly because they don't exist.

men start wars for only a few reasons, to increase access to resources that will make them more powerful. and i think the only other one is they are crazy. the 3rd reason might be they are crazy but still want to increase their access to resources.

[Rekaar.]

Karae you are one hateful son of a bitch. We're battling on semantics and yet you keep trying to drag me down to your level with insults and bitterness. Print out this thread and re-read it in 30 years when you're more interested in the truth of my position than in salvaging your low self-esteem.

I hope you're embarassed then to the same degree you are spiteful and arrogant now.

[Jice Virago]

So someone corners you with logic again and you claim they insulted you? How about making a well constructed argument and backing it with facts instead of playing wounded vagina next time someone deconstructs your ramshackle superstitions with deductive thought.

[Winnow]

Gods are just projections of what we socially define our tribes to be.

gods don't start wars, mostly because they don't exist.

Your big on the tribes thing : )

(I'd change the wording to state, belief in a GOD though not GOD as there is no such thing!)

Just in case you were directing that at me! : )

While I don't understand it fully myself, most of the human population requires religion to maintain their sanity. Since this is unavoidable, the only long term solution is to introduce a world religion that takes care of the main reasons for religions...fear of death...maintaining order (once again due to fear of repercussions in the afterlife), giving hope to people for whatever reason, and teaching a generic set of morals to children. As this new religion is introduced, slowly fade out current religions that, while all having their good points, suck overall compared to the new universal religion that has no enemies with long histories to bitch about. This would be our chance to take away the male/female issues with a non gendered god. Offer up incentives to switch to the new religion...maybe offer a HDTV in the developed world and maybe a can of food in the poorer countries. This new god would be represented by no symbol, form or name so that would save endless bitching over those things...or alternatively, it could be a lump of shit...something that no one could say was biased toward any previous religion.

This is my plan to save the world!

[VariaVespasa]

There is no such thing as making a decision together. That's not reality. In every situation either the two already agree or one must convince the other. In each situation, it rests on the final approval of one person. Depending on your position you will either plead your case seeking approval or plead your case seeking affirmation.

Er, if the two people agree, or come to agree through one being convinced then that IS making a decision together, doofus. Its only not making a decision together if one person goes ahead with whatever the idea under discussion is without securing the agreement of the other. Bringing an idea to the table and convincing the other person to go along with it is NOT you making that decision, its merely you originating the idea and initiating the conversation.

*Hugs*
Varia

[Truant]

Sorry rekaar'.'

In my relationship there is no decision made by one or the other except maybe which drive through to go to on thursday night when neither of us give a fuck.

Everything is thourougly discussed, calculated, and if necessary, compromised before decided, and enacted.

I really do not understand why you are dragging your argument out so long. Maybe in your life it really is the way you describe, but in mine, and practically everyone I have ever known, it is not.

[Thess]

Rekaar. has gone full circle with his argument, and each post of his just shows how wrong he is.

[masteen]

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

The snake doesn't actually deceive Eve. He tell her the truth: that the forbidden fruit grants knowledge of good and evil. Eve makes the choice to partake of it, and shares it with Adam.

Free will is not possible without knowledge of good and evil. Thus, Eve gave us our free will. That may not be the interpretation the Vatican wants to push forth, but it's certainly a valid and logical one.

You can blindly read sexism into any portion of the Bible you want to. I see what you are talking about, but I think you're seeing what the Catholic Church says you should see, and not what's necessarily contained in the text.

[Lalanae]

There is no one decision maker in my relationship either. If its a decision that affects us jointly (like with our house) we discuss it and if we don't agree we will put the discussion off for a little until both parties have had some time to think.

For example, we need our driveway widened. Bakara wanted to do bricking along the sides like we had seen in the neighborhood, but I didn't think it would look good with our curved driveway. If Bakara were like Rekkar and went ahead and bricked the sides of the driveway, he would have been short a companion for awhile. But he's not like that. Knowing that I didn't think it would work, he agreed to discuss other options. Both of us are reasonable people and we can discuss decisions without getting bent out of shape. He defers decisions to me when he doesn't care and I defer decisions to him when he doesn't care. Having one party make all the decisions would be a nightmare for both of us.

[Winnow]

You've lost me on this on Rekaar. In a relationship/marriage, there are strengths and weaknesses for each individual. While one member of a relationship/marriage may prefer or have more ability to research and analyze a problem, the important part is being able to present it to the other person in a clear way that allows open discussion about the issue.

I see no reason for one person in the relationship/marriage to be the exclusive decision maker as each may be better at dealing with various issues or tasks. What you do need is active participation from both people or eventually there will be a breakdown.

A simple example would be one person may be better at picking out vacation destinations than the other although before it is decided, it must be openly discussed. In another case, one person may enjoy researching automobiles and have much more knowledge and ability to present the facts in the discussion before the actual decision. Why make the the vacation specialist make the final decision on a car or vice versa?

[Drasta]

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

The snake doesn't actually deceive Eve. He tell her the truth: that the forbidden fruit grants knowledge of good and evil. Eve makes the choice to partake of it, and shares it with Adam.

Free will is not possible without knowledge of good and evil. Thus, Eve gave us our free will. That may not be the interpretation the Vatican wants to push forth, but it's certainly a valid and logical one.

You can blindly read sexism into any portion of the Bible you want to. I see what you are talking about, but I think you're seeing what the Catholic Church says you should see, and not what's necessarily contained in the text.

naa she had to have free will to take the apple in the first place

[Lalanae]

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

The snake doesn't actually deceive Eve. He tell her the truth: that the forbidden fruit grants knowledge of good and evil. Eve makes the choice to partake of it, and shares it with Adam.

Free will is not possible without knowledge of good and evil. Thus, Eve gave us our free will. That may not be the interpretation the Vatican wants to push forth, but it's certainly a valid and logical one.

You can blindly read sexism into any portion of the Bible you want to. I see what you are talking about, but I think you're seeing what the Catholic Church says you should see, and not what's necessarily contained in the text.

naa she had to have free will to take the apple in the first place

Don't Drasta!! You'll confuse them!!

[Drasta]

naa this will confuse them .... if she didn't have free will to take the apple then she was predestinended to take the apple but since the christians don't believe in pre-desitnation how could she of taken the apple without free will? or maybe she was pre-destined to take the apple from the tree and we all really have no free will at all but mearly an illusion of it.

[Adex_Xeda]

Free will is simply the ablity to make a decision that God wouldn't approve of. In this case Eve had free will before she knew the difference between good and evil.

[Zaelath]

Free will is simply the ablity to make a decision that God wouldn't approve of. In this case Eve had free will before she knew the difference between good and evil.

What? No it's fucking not...

[Drasta]

i semi agree with adex .... except free will is to do whatever the hell you want to do without anyform of restraint

[Adex_Xeda]

There is no one decision maker in my relationship either. If its a decision that affects us jointly (like with our house) we discuss it and if we don't agree we will put the discussion off for a little until both parties have had some time to think.

For example, we need our driveway widened. Bakara wanted to do bricking along the sides like we had seen in the neighborhood, but I didn't think it would look good with our curved driveway. If Bakara were like Rekkar and went ahead and bricked the sides of the driveway, he would have been short a companion for awhile. But he's not like that. Knowing that I didn't think it would work, he agreed to discuss other options. Both of us are reasonable people and we can discuss decisions without getting bent out of shape. He defers decisions to me when he doesn't care and I defer decisions to him when he doesn't care. Having one party make all the decisions would be a nightmare for both of us.

I see a marriage following biblical guidelines responding in a similar manner as you describe Lal.

[Adex_Xeda]

Well,

I see our lives as preexisting constructs. Everything we're going to do and everything did exist already, removed from time.

Free will then is just a way of perceiving our existance within a perspective constrained by time.


We're simply threads woven into a solid chunk of universe. Time is just a dimension of it like width and height.

It's probably a an immense, sparkling and multifacted conversation piece sitting on the Master Artist's coffee table.

[Zaelath]

Or to summarise:

<theory> <belief>

<belief>

<belief> <undisputed but unrelated fact>

<joke?>