I needed to lap back around to this. Are you saying in biblical days slaves were treated well?
What about the ones whove spent lots of time/money getting a fancy new peach to replace that peep?However, if you've got a peep, take it to the men's room.
I lost track of the story, but weren't they allowing this very thing in NC. They were at least considering it. If it is being considered then it is no longer a hypothetical in my book. I'm not going to wait around for them to allow pervs in women's restrooms with my wife and daughters. Once they allow it, it is that much more difficult to reverse.
What about the ones whove spent lots of time/money getting a fancy new peach to replace that peep?
Its a complex issue. I have trouble deciding where I stand on it myself. I wonder whos more likely to face some sort assault or battery in one of these hypotheticals: a young girl at the hands of someone claiming to identify as female or some post op transgender person forced to use a mens room.
I lost track of the story, but weren't they allowing this very thing in NC. They were at least considering it. If it is being considered then it is no longer a hypothetical in my book. I'm not going to wait around for them to allow pervs in women's restrooms with my wife and daughters. Once they allow it, it is that much more difficult to reverse.
Im saying that slavery was completely different. It had nothing to do with race. You werent enslaved because you were black or any other color.
Slavery was a system in their economy. If you lost a job and could not support your family, there was no welfare. You could however, volunteer to become a slave until you either worked off your debt or earned enough to pay it off. That does not mean that some slave owners werent harsh, Im sure some were. But in the majority of cases this was a business decision people had to make to survive, not something they were forced into and nothing to do with race. It would be more applicable to employer/employee relationship than to American slavery that people so often think of.
So what are the NT writers doing when they call for slaves to obey their masters? Are they condoning slavery as a system? No, but the economy was based off of slavery. Paul was not going to call for a slave revolt to try and overturn the entire economic system of the day. . If he were it would not only have major economic impact on the society of the day, but it would have also led to the massacre and imprisonment of many Christian people. But the bottom line is that the gospel is not spread through revolution, but through preaching. Christianity does not involve picking up the sword and forcing it on people, tho some have wrongly done that.
Literally got called a homophobe this week because I said I dont want men in womens bathrooms.
Thats not really a Christian stance. Just a normal I dont want penis in the bathroom with my daughter cause I have a brain stance.
Cause he identifies as a woman.
you and I are on the same pageAny op. If you are born with a penis you are a dude.
Just in general Im against it. If I have to explain why then theres no sense in having the convo.
For the record I dont get hung up on it cause I dont let my kids go to sketchy bathrooms by themselves and I plan to equip them with how to handle situations. In this case I was asked my opinion and said Im not for penis in the girls bathroom.
It is ridiculous. And as a North Carolinian, it pissed me off that it got to the point that someone "felt" so victimized because they were asked to go the bathroom that matched their physiology, that the state felt they needed to govern what bathrooms we go to.....or at least remind the general public that it was up to the proprietor of a given business how "men's room" and "women's room" would be defined....and you weren't going to be allowed to be sued for discrimination as a result of that definition...I think it was for schools for kids with gender problems which to me is a mental disorder and has nothing to do with bathrooms. It was a stupid state government overreach. Have a gender neutral one hitter as a last resort anything else is like i said ridiculous and just gets both sides riled up.
Thats some serious sugarcoating of slavery. Non slaves had a horrible existence i cant imagine the horror of slavery back then.
As for your last sentence some...thats an understatement.
Im not sugarcoating anything. But we shouldnt expect the NT to call for a revolt against the Roman government and to try and overturn an entire economic system. Would be foolish and not the way the gospel is spread. Most people hear Dawkins say things like the Bible supports slavery and take it as gospel, when the fact is that Dawkins and others like him havent spent 2 minutes studying the subject. But I digress.
I dont know what you want me to say about travesties committed in the name of Christianity. It has happened, and its happened because people are sinners. Christ didnt kill anyone nor did the disciples. And He never taught us to. In fact, as demonstrated above, He taught the opposite. The gospel is not spread through force. The characteristics of the kingdom is that they are to be meek and that they will be persecuted according to Jesus in Matthew 5. They were not to be the persecutors. But people have ignored this and have done evil in the name of Christ. But just because they name Him doesnt mean that they truly know Him or represent Him.
At one point NC actually had a bill legislating that you had to use public restrooms based on birth sex.
It didnt turn out well for them.
If I call my dog a cat it will still never be a cat. Insanity.
