interesting

interesting

Jodi
Jodi

December 19th, 2004, 10:28 pm #1


I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here"

If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic.

They tend to blow people out.

I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever.

Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board.

Just my opinion.
Reply
Share

fashiondreamer
fashiondreamer

December 19th, 2004, 11:11 pm #2

Yes Jodi, I have noticed and I have to agree with you
Reply
Share

peter
peter

December 20th, 2004, 12:59 am #3

I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here"

If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic.

They tend to blow people out.

I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever.

Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board.

Just my opinion.
I agree 100%.
Too much antagonism occurs and these are topics that do flame up. I personally would like to stick to the core topics.
Reply
Share

Anudist
Anudist

December 20th, 2004, 1:36 am #4

I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here"

If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic.

They tend to blow people out.

I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever.

Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board.

Just my opinion.
I tend to agree but if we take away politics and religion all we are left with is SEX.

Is that what we want to become????


Reply
Share

peter
peter

December 20th, 2004, 2:04 am #5

Reply
Share

Wayne
Wayne

December 20th, 2004, 8:39 pm #6

I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here"

If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic.

They tend to blow people out.

I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever.

Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board.

Just my opinion.
I have very mixed feelings about what you said.

<< I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here" >>

I agree, and have been resisting the temptation to reply to the recent ones for this exact reason.

<< If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic. >>

See final comments.

<< They tend to blow people out. >>

I don't think discussions do this to people. I think that it is arguments that do this, and I think that discussions here have all too often quickly become arguments.

<< I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever. >>

Agreed.

<< Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board. >>

I think you are wrong on this. Remember that this is the "Breast Freedom Forum" and that there is a strong connection between freedom and politics and between freedom and religion. Think about why there is a need for this forum. It is because some people are opposed to breast freedom. Some of them try to enforce their beliefs in ways that I think probably violate the sexual harrassment laws in many states, but I've never heard of any of them being prosecuted for it. Others enforce their beliefs by getting laws passed banning breast freedom.

Many of these anti-freedom people--I think most--are strongly influenced by their religion.

If religion and politics are not to be part of Breast Freedom Forum, then you have severely limited the chance of being a force for change. We need to be willing to talk about how to deal with the negative influence that religion and politics have on freedom (and I think that this applies to all freedoms; you don't achieve much if you only want one freedom). Arguing is counterproductive.

Let me give one simple example. There have been some pro and anti Christian things said lately. It is clear to me that the opposition of many Christians to breast freedom has nothing to do with Christ. It has, rather, to do with the followers of Paul, who were able to gradually change the church to conform to their beliefs, rather than those of Christ.

I don't know if the Paulists influenced the Orthodox church or not. Perhaps michaela can tell us this. Maybe her church doesn't have a misogynist heritage.

In any case, you don't get anywhere attacking someones beliefs. That just makes them defend them all the more. If you think that their beliefs are wrong, the only hope of getting them to change is to show them that they believe two things which are in direct conflict. Then, if they are capable of rational thought where their beliefs are concerned, you can get them to consider which belief is correct. Thus, I think that they only way to get Christians to consider whether some of their beliefs are good or bad for women is to get them to consider whether these beliefs came from both Christ and Paul, only Christ, only Paul, or neither.

Remember, the biggest problem most people have with the religious right is that when they think that God has told them something, they won't change their beliefs, no matter how strong the evidence that those beliefs are wrong. But if you can show them that God didn't tell them any such thing, and neither did Christ, then you have a chance of getting them to think.

Now, I challenge those on BFF who think that the role of religion in suppressing breast freedom needs to be discussed if that freedom is to be secured to find a way to discuss the issue in a polite manner. You don't do that by bashing religion, but it isn't bashing a religion to ask if a follower's beliefs are basic to his religion, or something that got added later.

Before you accuse me of stirring things up again, I should add that I too have been considering giving up of BFF because I haven't found much in the way of productive discussion lately. If I have stirred up an argument, rather than a discussion, then it may be time for me to leave too.
Reply
Share

michaela
michaela

December 20th, 2004, 10:06 pm #7

Thank you Wayne for your thoughtful post.
Misogyny...it is an interesting question because there are many who think Paul didn't like women. I don't believe the Orthodox Church hates women though it would seem that way to the outsider. There are Traditions that have been upheld that would cause many to believe that the Church is unfair to women. I am not a priest or teacher of theology so I am not the best one to answer these questions. I would strongly recommend that you research your questions incase I am off the mark. There are truck loads of books written on Orthodox teachings that have been translated into English to reference.

The fact that women are not allowed to become priests is the biggest question that comes to peoples minds. However the Orthodox priest is allowed to be a married man as long as he was married first before becoming a priest. This at least brings the idea that marriage is valued and a high vocation in the mind of the church. One easily gets the impression from Paul that marriage is not to be sought or valued, and the Roman Catholic church helps promote this idea with there rules on celibacy and the priesthood. So it is elitist and makes woman feel less. Though Orthodox women are not taught from the beginning of their lives that marriage is what they have to do with their lives.

Now I may be going way out on a limb here because I haven't heard my pastor or any other in authority speak about this, but I have to wonder if the female was restricted from the priesthood from the get go, (ancient times, before Christ), because of the Old Covenant laws regarding blood. In some jurisdictions of the Orthodox church, old calendarists mostly, woman aren't allowed to come to Liturgy when it is their time of the month. But that rule has been left aside in the Antiochian, OCA, and I think Greek Orthodox jurisdictions. But I think it is something interesting to ponder.

I don't know any women in my community, or any I have been in through our military travels who wanted to be priests. There was only one, and she was a story, but I won't get into that here. The women I know are mothers and wives, and career woman, and college students, and one is even married with a PhD in some very complicated science that escapes my mind at the moment.

Essentially, the Orthodox is a come as you are church that promotes living to your fullest potential spiritually and recognizes that if you are a person living in the world, not a monk, that you must work and have stuff and take care of your kids. But the church doesn't take a judgmental attitude toward the individual, or any other faith community outside the Church, like, to say they aren't going to be saved, as some Christian groups will say, other than those other faith communities are outside the Church, but God is merciful. I am not God, so I will not say who is saved. I will not even say I am saved. I will work out my salvation with fear and trembling.

I am a believer in what the Church teaches and I am a believer in all the things we are about here at BFF. I do not think I have to make a decision as to whether or not one is right or wrong and choose one over the other. There is room for all of my thinking and all of my faith where I am.

I do not believe we should not be able to talk about the two topics in question here either, for the same reason. They are part of our lives. I am a person of faith, of the Book, and I am interested in what is going on in the world, so policy is there too. Unfortunately there are some who do not understand the difference between having a polite discussion or even a heated debate and being angry, hurtful, hateful, and personally attacking those with whom they are speaking to. So how do we avoid getting into these situations in the future? I just think my original statement still is the best for me; that I would rather not talk about my religion or politics in any depth. If the subject comes up, and no one is getting nasty, I will join the conversation, but if there is an attack, I think I will just put the attacker on ‘ignore’ and got find something else to do.

I don’t want anyone to leave BFF, and I don’t want to leave BFF. I don’t want to fight either. I don’t want to come on here and be attacked out of left field, no pun intended, when I say something obviously thought provoking. I would like to see everyone have open enough minds to be able to have discussions about weightier matters without throwing insults around. I have not SHOUTED, and I have not wielded insult one to either Nicky or Cassie, and yet they feel they can talk to me in a most insulting manner any time they wish. Nicky has even boasted about two degrees. I would think that much education would have afforded her the ability to be civil and genteel in her speech.

This is a long response, I know, and barely scratches the surface of Wayne’s very interesting comments and questions, but I don’t want to be like Paul and talk so long that I kill someone. I am not sure I would be able to bring them back to life, as he did.


Reply
Share

michaela
michaela

December 20th, 2004, 11:00 pm #8

Looking back at some of these posts I see that Nicky did not insult me directly, it was only Cassie. Nicky was insulting when she inferred that Peter was illiterate (open a book), and sometime I guess I have trouble not feeling what effects him, just as he feels what effects me. My apologies for that mistake.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

December 20th, 2004, 11:43 pm #9

I have very mixed feelings about what you said.

<< I have seen a lot of things get out of hand here lately and too many people saying " I'm outta here" >>

I agree, and have been resisting the temptation to reply to the recent ones for this exact reason.

<< If you notice, I refuse to get into discussions where politics and religeon are the topic. >>

See final comments.

<< They tend to blow people out. >>

I don't think discussions do this to people. I think that it is arguments that do this, and I think that discussions here have all too often quickly become arguments.

<< I hate to see some of these long time people leaving and I hope this don't run them off forever. >>

Agreed.

<< Personally I think these 2 topics should be off limits, they are also off topic for this board. >>

I think you are wrong on this. Remember that this is the "Breast Freedom Forum" and that there is a strong connection between freedom and politics and between freedom and religion. Think about why there is a need for this forum. It is because some people are opposed to breast freedom. Some of them try to enforce their beliefs in ways that I think probably violate the sexual harrassment laws in many states, but I've never heard of any of them being prosecuted for it. Others enforce their beliefs by getting laws passed banning breast freedom.

Many of these anti-freedom people--I think most--are strongly influenced by their religion.

If religion and politics are not to be part of Breast Freedom Forum, then you have severely limited the chance of being a force for change. We need to be willing to talk about how to deal with the negative influence that religion and politics have on freedom (and I think that this applies to all freedoms; you don't achieve much if you only want one freedom). Arguing is counterproductive.

Let me give one simple example. There have been some pro and anti Christian things said lately. It is clear to me that the opposition of many Christians to breast freedom has nothing to do with Christ. It has, rather, to do with the followers of Paul, who were able to gradually change the church to conform to their beliefs, rather than those of Christ.

I don't know if the Paulists influenced the Orthodox church or not. Perhaps michaela can tell us this. Maybe her church doesn't have a misogynist heritage.

In any case, you don't get anywhere attacking someones beliefs. That just makes them defend them all the more. If you think that their beliefs are wrong, the only hope of getting them to change is to show them that they believe two things which are in direct conflict. Then, if they are capable of rational thought where their beliefs are concerned, you can get them to consider which belief is correct. Thus, I think that they only way to get Christians to consider whether some of their beliefs are good or bad for women is to get them to consider whether these beliefs came from both Christ and Paul, only Christ, only Paul, or neither.

Remember, the biggest problem most people have with the religious right is that when they think that God has told them something, they won't change their beliefs, no matter how strong the evidence that those beliefs are wrong. But if you can show them that God didn't tell them any such thing, and neither did Christ, then you have a chance of getting them to think.

Now, I challenge those on BFF who think that the role of religion in suppressing breast freedom needs to be discussed if that freedom is to be secured to find a way to discuss the issue in a polite manner. You don't do that by bashing religion, but it isn't bashing a religion to ask if a follower's beliefs are basic to his religion, or something that got added later.

Before you accuse me of stirring things up again, I should add that I too have been considering giving up of BFF because I haven't found much in the way of productive discussion lately. If I have stirred up an argument, rather than a discussion, then it may be time for me to leave too.
I think the reason politics and religion keep coming up is that there is a inextricable link between religion, politics and breast freedom. It is laws made by politicians and based on people's attitudes that limit breast freedom and these are largely based on people's perception of religious teachings. So to simply exclude discussion of these topics is like having a forum on gardening but prohibiting discussions about bugs or fertilizer. I certainly think it should be done in a civil and respectful manner however.
Reply
Like
Share

Michaela
Michaela

December 20th, 2004, 11:55 pm #10

I totally agree. Some wonder why I won't speak about my political beliefs. It is precisely because they would sooner bury me in your buggy garden than wait and hear what I might have to say. I would be killed. One even said that I have a 'woe is me, I'm so persecuted' attitude. I don't feel woe is me at all. I just know from experience where it goes. But we should, absolutely, be able to talk about all subjects because in one way or another thay are relevant.
Reply
Share