Author Topic: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3  (Read 252741 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #720 on: August 07, 2010, 04:48:13 PM »
Thanks for the correction on the gender issue. I guess that is why Queen Victoria wasn't for women's rights because she rules as a man. The present Queen is the head of the Anglican Church who is just begining to accept women priests and bishops.

There is also a lot of opposition within the church to this, Eric, from those who closely follow Biblical teaching.  The Queen is very likely to privately support this too as she is known to be a traditionalist.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #721 on: August 07, 2010, 09:00:11 PM »
Yes. She was a traditionalist alright (Queen Victoria), she believed than men are better than women.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #722 on: August 08, 2010, 01:30:38 AM »
People who don't think women should be priests or bishops within the church don't necessarily think men are better than women, Eric.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #723 on: August 08, 2010, 01:49:30 AM »
Well the implication is that god thinks women are inferior and that would be the same as saying women are not as good as men.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #724 on: August 08, 2010, 01:51:33 AM »
That is your interpretation.  Maybe God just thinks men and women are different and because of that should have different roles.  He probably doesn't want men pretending to be mothers, either.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #725 on: August 08, 2010, 01:57:08 AM »
It is not just my interpretation.  It has been widely discussed academically and in the media.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #726 on: August 08, 2010, 03:01:32 AM »
Although I am in favour of women priests and bishops, I know plenty of people (men and women) who oppose this who in no way think women are inferior to men; Grace has every right to point this out.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #727 on: August 08, 2010, 03:56:03 AM »
And if women are equal to men why aren't they acceptable as priests, bishops and cardinals?  The early christian church had no lack of female clergy. Grace has every right to make her point, as I do to make mine.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #728 on: August 08, 2010, 05:30:19 AM »
No, you were denying Grace the right to make her point, by implying that people who oppose the ordination of women are really doing so because they think women are inferior, and the theological and other arguments that they put forward can therefore be dismissed out of hand.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #729 on: August 08, 2010, 05:56:09 AM »
Did i erase her comment? You have a very flawed sense of free speech and a biased attitude.  Obviously you don't believe in free speech and debate.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #730 on: August 08, 2010, 06:26:18 AM »
Oh, I do, but I try to show people the courtesy of accepting that they are arguing in good faith, until it becomes clear that they are not.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #731 on: August 08, 2010, 06:29:20 AM »
According to your very normative parameters.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #732 on: August 08, 2010, 07:05:30 AM »
I wasn't meaning to suggest that you were't arguing in good faith, but that your reply to Grace suggested that you weren't willing to concede that to people who oppose the ordination of women.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #733 on: August 08, 2010, 07:28:33 AM »
Good then.  Debate is healthy.

Offline Eric_Lowe

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 16999
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #734 on: August 08, 2010, 10:06:01 PM »
According to church history, women were allowed to be leaders (even disciples) in the begining. Later they were shut out by church historians. The verse of whom Paul said women should be silent is now declared that it wasn't written by Paul. So women should have the right to play a role (priests or bishops) were not against the wishes of the original chrch under Paul. Queen Victoria was taught that women were stupid, while men should be trusted to lead is an outdated idea. The present Queen is also a tradionalist, but interesting is a working mother as well.