Is patriarchy inherently wrong?

[AgnosticBoy]

This topic is related to another topic that questions why God would make rules that subjugate women. I can accept that there are rules in the Bible that subjugate women. What I don't agree with are the views and that says that all rules involving men being over women (or taking a lead role) are wrong. I question these views because there are some patriarchal standards that are good or that don't cause harm and/or the suppression of women.

When I've had this conversation in the past, I tend to find a lot of assumptions of how patriarchy should be (as if there's only one way to lead - the dictator way?) or I find a lot of double-standards. So let's debate!

Is patriarchy inherently wrong (meaning any or all forms are wrong)?

[William]

[Replying to mms20102 in post #49]

So you are denying basic biology and want to argue about God, seriously.... I have nothing to discuss if it's going to be only sophistry.

It is hard to determine why you are accusing me of what you are accusing me of.

I'm not accusing you I'm showing you reality that you deny.
Any mind needs source of power to work and since it needs something it can't be God.

According to that theory, God's mind is not God because it requires power to work...
If this power is mindless and is God, then what you are arguing for is a mindless God.

I just want to know why are you deviating from the main topic I recommend making a new subject and add me

There is no need to make a new subject. The main topic is asking the question "Is patriarchy inherently wrong?" so no, I have not deviated.

[mms20102]

[Replying to William in post #51]

According to that theory, God's mind is not God because it requires power to work...
If this power is mindless and is God, then what you are arguing for is a mindless God.

Who said that God needs mind in the first place is it me or you ?! ( Straw man fallacy )

[mms20102]

[Replying to help3434 in post #50]

I don't think you proved it.

I said you misunderstood it. Then later you dropped three links that were studies of abused lgb kids without comment. You didn't use them to bolster an argument.

Let me see, you saw that I didn't prove an argument that you don't know! Take a deep breath re-read what you wrote and be sure you have a point to discuss thank you.

(The) argument the source wasn't reliable for, is the same argument for the links you haven't seen, is the same argument of the links I sent.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #51]

According to that theory, God's mind is not God because it requires power to work...
If this power is mindless and is God, then what you are arguing for is a mindless God.

Who said that God needs mind in the first place is it me or you ?! ( Straw man fallacy )

I say God is mind, and in that, there is no requirement to think of God as being only a particular gender.

I understand that mindfulness is necessary in order for intelligent creation. Is that not the way you see it too?

[mms20102]

[Replying to William in post #54]

I say God is mind, and in that, there is no requirement to think of God as being only a particular gender.

I understand that mindfulness is necessary in order for intelligent creation. Is that not the way you see it too?

You say God is mind but I told you it's false because mind is not characteristic of God and God can't have mind because having mind means you need something and God can't need anything.

Intelligent creation not "creator"

And again you repeating straw man fallacy since I didn't say God has a gender you supposed what I didn't say

[William]

[Replying to William in post #54]

I say God is mind, and in that, there is no requirement to think of God as being only a particular gender.

I understand that mindfulness is necessary in order for intelligent creation. Is that not the way you see it too?

You say God is mind but I told you it's false because mind is not characteristic of God and God can't have mind because having mind means you need something and God can't need anything.

Intelligent creation not "creator"

And again you repeating straw man fallacy since I didn't say God has a gender you supposed what I didn't say

No I did not suppose anything about you. I simply stated what I supposed and why I supposed it.
Do you want to be understood?
If so, then please make it so. If you are not wanting to be understood then by all means proceed as you are, for I have better things to do with my time.

[help3434]

[Replying to mms20102 in post #53]

What is the argument?

[mms20102]

[Replying to William in post #56]

And I replied to what you supposed as being wrong and why it's wrong yet you failed to defend it. If you have anything more to add please let me know and if not thanks for the conversation.

[nameless]

[Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #1]
"Is patriarchy inherently wrong?"

Not anything is inherently 'right' or 'wrong'.
Such exist only in the judgmental eye of the unSaved beholder!

[otseng]

Such exist only in the judgmental eye of the unSaved beholder!

Moderator Comment

Please debate without commenting on groups of people.

Please review the Rules.





______________



Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.