Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #81

    Jun 24, 2022, 02:15 PM
    And even before that when women were men's property because, after all, it says in Genesis that a wife should, Stepford style, cleave to her husband as the head of the house.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #82

    Jun 24, 2022, 02:39 PM
    You've got it backwards. It actually says this. "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." So note that the husband actually does both the leaving and the cleaving. It never says what you claimed, and it certainly does not say that the woman becomes the man's property.

    This is where you can say, "Whoops. Made a mistake."
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #83

    Jun 24, 2022, 02:48 PM
    [God] took one of [Adam's] ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man to be man's HELPER.

    In Genesis 2:18 it says, “And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” The common way in which the term “help meet” is interpreted is to mean that Eve, unlike the other beasts of the earth, was “appropriate for” or “worthy” of Adam and was to be his helper or companion on the earth.

    Then in Genesis 3, To the woman He said,“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

    Of course, it's all allegory. Too bad so many men take it as truth.

    (P.S. Don't mess with a PK!)
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #84

    Jun 24, 2022, 03:38 PM
    For a country that holds its Rights and Freedoms dearly, this action, and subsequent State mandates, utterly beggars belief...
    and the primary right to protect is the one being the right to life .

    14th amendment :
    No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.(14th amendment )

    The Declaration of Independence :
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


    5th Amendment :
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

    The decision does NOT ban abortions . It brings the decision back to the states. The court kicked the decision back to the proper place to make the call .......the elective branches of government , The court improperly made the decision in 1973 . The court had no business making a political decision of such a magnitude . This court rectified and reversed a bad call by the Supreme Court .
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #85

    Jun 24, 2022, 03:41 PM
    This is where you can say, "Whoops. Made a mistake."
    I knew it was too much to hope for. This statement, "And even before that when women were men's property because, after all, it says in Genesis that a wife should, Stepford style, cleave to her husband as the head of the house," was completely wrong. Nowhere does it say that the woman becomes the man's property or that she was to "cleave" to him. You got it completely wrong and seem to be just too proud, I guess, to admit it, even when faced with the fact that it is the man, in truth, who cleaves to the wife. Now it is true that the husband has authority over his wife, in the same way that he has a responsibility to love her with the same love Jesus has for the church. You might want to reference what leadership entails in the NT era.

    The decision does NOT ban abortions . It brings the decision back to the states. The court kicked the decision back to the proper place to make the call .......the elective branches of government , The court improperly made the decision in 1973 . The court had no business making a political decision of such a magnitude . This court rectified and reversed a bad call by the Supreme Court .
    Exactly correct. Now we'll see how well the "peaceful protests" crowd accepts it.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #86

    Jun 24, 2022, 03:46 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    ...seem to be just too proud, I guess, to admit it, even when faced with the fact that it is the man, in truth, who cleaves to the wife. Now it is true that the husband has authority over his wife, in the same way that he has a responsibility to love her with the same love Jesus has for the church.
    You're having a big problem with that word "cleave", arncha! The literalist hard at work. And you are too stubborn to admit I'm correct. After all, you do believe women are supposed to cleave to men. Men rule!!! Women submit!
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #87

    Jun 24, 2022, 04:01 PM
    I have a big problem with people who make claims that clearly are untrue and are too unspeakably arrogant to simply admit it. You claimed that husbands own their wives and that the wives are to "cleave" to their husbands. Both claims are flatly wrong. If that's not true, then show us where you find support for them. Otherwise, forget it.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #88

    Jun 24, 2022, 04:12 PM
    In Genesis 2:18 it says, “And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” The common way in which the term “help meet” is interpreted is to mean that Eve, unlike the other beasts of the earth, was “appropriate for” or “worthy” of Adam and was to be his helper or companion on the earth.

    Then in Genesis 3, To the woman He said,“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and
    he will rule over you.”

    A wife isn't supposed to cleave to her husband?
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #89

    Jun 24, 2022, 04:13 PM
    Ronald Reagan: I've noticed that everybody who is for abortion has already been born. - YouTube
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #90

    Jun 24, 2022, 04:46 PM
    You go from confident assertions to insecure questions. I guess that’s progress, but still no support for women being owned by their husbands or wives cleaving to husbands.

    Tom, Reagan had it exactly right. This has been a great day.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #91

    Jun 24, 2022, 06:20 PM
    To be clear, wives and husbands are to cleave to each other in the sense of being faithful to each other, to cling to each other, but it is not just for the wife, and it is only stated as such for the husband. So your original proposition was simply not correct, and that's where this whole silly thing got started.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #92

    Jun 24, 2022, 06:26 PM
    And you are a literalist. "But but but it doesn't say the wife cleaves. It's the husband who is supposed to cleave!!! Genesis says it that way exactly!!!"

    So therefore, wives don't have to cleave. Got it!
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #93

    Jun 24, 2022, 07:30 PM
    You were wrong. Period. Women are not owned and it does not say, as you falsely claimed, that wives “cleave”. Nonsense.

    But since we are again in non-literal territory, I understand you to be admitting you were wrong. Wonderful, Wondergirl!
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #94

    Jun 24, 2022, 07:59 PM
    I admitted nothing, Mr. Literalist.

    If women aren't owned, why aren't they allowed control of their bodies?
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #95

    Jun 24, 2022, 08:26 PM
    If women aren't owned, why aren't they allowed control of their bodies?
    You claimed, "And even before that when women were men's property because, after all, it says in Genesis that a wife should, Stepford style, cleave to her husband as the head of the house." That is flatly wrong. It is stated nowhere in Genesis that women are property or that they must "cleave" to their husbands. It says, in fact, the exact opposite, that it is the husband who must cleave. Now once you get honest enough to admit to that, we can continue.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #96

    Jun 24, 2022, 09:17 PM
    That's the entire point of the creation of Eve. Eve. Cleave. Get it???

    Doesn't your wife cleave to you? Hasn't she for years?
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #97

    Jun 25, 2022, 01:32 AM
    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Gen 2:24


    The passage is talking about the man . He leaves his parental and extended family and cleaves( to adhere firmly and closely or loyally and unwaveringly) to his wife . That means his wife comes first before his multi-generational family . It is as simple as that . It has NOTHING to do with the woman being subservient .

    This passage has nothing to do with the abortion debate . Abortion is an unholy act of murdering an innocent baby.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #98

    Jun 25, 2022, 03:01 AM
    The Dobbs decision has nothing to do with religion or morality . It represents a return to the rule of law. Whatever the issue is ;if it is not in the Constitution under the powers granted to the executive or legislative branch ;then it is NOT subject to Federal Law . The only way to make it Federal would be through the amendment process.

    The sure way to know it is not constitutional is when the judiciary ,reading tea leaves ,or scouring the text of the Constitution to find emanations and penumbras ,invent rights that are not in the text . What we had since 1973 was a 9 person unelected ,appointed for life oligarchy in robes creating law instead of their proper function of interpreting laws or orders passed by the elected branches .

    The Powers not enumerated to the federal government are reserved for the states and the people.(10th Amendment)

    “The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”
    19-1392 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (06/24/2022) (supremecourt.gov)

    Congress will try to make a logic for Federal law . They will cling to their progressive era love affair with the commerce clause . (Art 1 Sec 8 clause 3)
    The Congress shall have power to .....regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
    Janet Yellen made the opening salvo in testimony to the Senate Banking Committee

    “I believe that eliminating the right of women to make decisions about when and whether to have children would have very damaging effects on the economy and would set women back decades,”

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen makes economic case for protecting abortion rights - YouTube
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,019, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #99

    Jun 25, 2022, 06:05 AM
    It's amazing how many wonderful excuses liberal dems (and, rather sadly, some repubs) can come up with to justify the killing of innocent human beings. It is going down the same road Germany went down in the 30's.

    The fifth and fourteenth amendments should have been called on in this decision. Abortion is clearly a violation of both amendments. "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
    Curlyben's Avatar
    Curlyben Posts: 18,514, Reputation: 1860
    BossMan
     
    #100

    Jun 25, 2022, 07:39 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    It's amazing how many wonderful excuses liberal dems (and, rather sadly, some repubs) can come up with to justify the killing of innocent human beings. It is going down the same road Germany went down in the 30's.
    A leap too far there, what was pursued by Germany in the 30's was a program called eugenics which had much farther ranging consequences. Bringing the Nazis into a discussion has other effects though.

    Have a look at the Euro approach, most have some form of legislation in place that allows abortion.
    Pages 7&8 give a good break down in a visual tabular format.
    https://reproductiverights.org/wp-co...ive-review.pdf

    The fifth and fourteenth amendments should have been called on in this decision. Abortion is clearly a violation of both amendments. "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
    The real question here is the definition of when life begins.
    Your contention sees this as at the point of conception, in which case I fully support your contention, despite disagreeing with your position.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search


Check out some similar questions!

Babies feeding schedule [ 2 Answers ]

My Baby is7 months old, what should be the number of feeding apart from breastfeeding per day? I am working women and is away from my baby for 12 hrs. what should we feed in my absence and what should be the number of feeds?

Angel babies waiting to be born [ 2 Answers ]

Over the years I've thought had this memory of an old black & white movie where, toward the end a nearly or perhaps closing scene depicted 2 toddlers as angel babies sitting on clouds in heaven waiting to be born. They were looking downward toward earth and had spotted their prospective parents...

What percent of the babies born with each gestation period have a low birth weight [ 1 Answers ]

Gestation Period Mean Birth Weight Standard Deviation Under 28 weeks 1.88 lb 1.19 lb 28 to 31 weeks 4.07 lb 1.87 lb 32 to 35 weeks 5.73 lb 1.48 lb 36 weeks 6.46 lb 1.20 lb 37 to 39 weeks 7.33 lb 1.09 lb 40 weeks 7.72 lb 1.05 lb 41 weeks 7.83 lb 1.08 lb 42 weeks and over 7.65 lb 1.12 lb

Babies born with out brains [ 1 Answers ]

I'm doing another paper.. and this one is about babies born without brains. There is hardley any info on this topic so I was wondering if anyone knew anything... im writing a persuasive essay and I think babies born without brains should be kept alive long enough to be organ donors? What do you...

Feeding new born pup [ 2 Answers ]

Hi all, hope someone can help please. My daughters staff has just given birth on Sunday evening, after four hours of labour she had 8 pups, all well except the last one which we did not really notice for the first couple of days,she is so tiny and when I picked her up to my astonishment she has no...


View more questions Search