You are completely correct, but only when used to as a tool to unmask the truth, not to divert attention from it.
Religions Contempt and Control of Women
Sun, 2008-06-08 06:42
#52
Sun, 2008-06-08 06:56
#53
Doesn't this beg the issues by setting "the truth" as preexisting inquiry? Isn't it inappropriate to cast aspersions on one's opponents' intentions? And, to get back to the thread theme, haven't women always been called "irreverent" and accused of "detracting attention" from the "real" issues?
[ 08 June 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
Sun, 2008-06-08 10:53
#54
Hi martin dufresne.
I really don't understand your comments.
I would have thought that the truth is always the objective of any point of issue.
Obviously what may be truth to one person may not be to another.
But in this case, I think it is accepted by most that rabbis and cantors and other professionals in positions of trust must know their boundaries.
That it is not acceptable to commit adultery by either a man or a woman.
As for holding women irreverent, I again don't understand.
I personally have not done so.
Indeed we live in an era when a woman could easily have become President of the United States.
How wonderful !!
No, I think the main issue here is not if the women also bear responsibility for their behaviour.
Obviously they do.
The difference is that the professional involved has betrayed more than just his own family.
He has betrayed his office, his community, and his religion.
He can be held civilly and even maybe criminally liable.
I think that the general way of dealing with such issues in the past was to say, "O well, boys will be boys", but then to condemn the women.
No both must be held accountable, but the professional is the one in control, and his responsibility is far greater.
Society is still not comfortable holding men accountable for such behaviour.
Society still has a way to go.
Sun, 2008-06-08 12:32
#55
I merely commented on the criteria you offered, not on the specific issue/behaviour involved. (For the record, I agree with remind and Rebecca West and disagree with unionist about this man being in a position of authority.)
My formal response to your posts was that the truth is never known beforehand - hence you can't establish that someone is trying to detract from it - and that irreverence is essential in ferreting it out in a faith-based system where women are supposed to have rights but are mysteriously frusrated of them - notably by semantic distinctions - when push comes to shove.
Sun, 2008-06-08 13:07
#56
I now understand.
I think you and I are of similar minds.
I re-read some of the nonsense that Unionist posted.
I feel certain that if she really had 13 years of knowledge, then she really learned nothing, or she has intentionally posted comments designed to defend Gabriel.
She must have some connection to the guy.
Most of her comments are either misleading, flat out wrong, or lies.
Sun, 2008-06-08 15:02
#57
remind
Unionist = he and he is Jewish
Sun, 2008-06-08 18:27
#58
Jewish I can see.
But how do you know that it is a "he"?
Sun, 2008-06-08 18:55
#59
M. Spector
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00015254]Same way we "know" that you are a "he".[/url]
Mon, 2008-06-09 04:06
#60
quote:
Originally posted by the truth:
[b]I feel certain that if she really had 13 years of knowledge, then she really learned nothing, or she has intentionally posted comments designed to defend Gabriel.
She must have some connection to the guy.
Most of her comments are either misleading, flat out wrong, or lies.[/b]
Once again, you are violating babble policy. You are not allowed to call other babblers liars. And unionist has been posting to this site for years - he certainly didn't just happen to come along and start posting on this topic, so it's pretty obvious that he's not just here because he "has some connection to the guy".
People are allowed to comment and (gasp!) disagree with you without having aspersions cast upon them by you.
Refrain in future, or go somewhere else. It's a great big internet.
Tue, 2008-06-10 10:47
#61
Hi Michelle, you are right.
I was very wrong to call uniounist a liar.
Such a thing will never happen again.
any other comments some of the other things I said?
Tue, 2008-06-10 10:53
#62
quote:
Originally posted by the truth:
Hi Michelle, you are right.
I was very wrong to call uniounist a liar.
Such a thing will never happen again.
Thanks!
quote:
any other comments some of the other things I said?
Nope, that was it.