Women's Rights

[Amie]

Women’s Rights
Author and Page information

* by Anup Shah
* This Page Last Updated Thursday, February 15, 2007

Women’s rights around the world are an important indicator of understanding global well-being. Many may think that women’s rights are only an issue in countries where religion is law, such as many Muslim countries. Or even worse, some may think this is no longer an issue at all. But reading this report about the United Nation’s Women’s Treaty and how an increasing number of countries are lodging reservations, will show otherwise.

To read the full article and use the links embedded in it: http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/WomensRights.asp

Women's Issues have everything to do with human rights in general. Humanity as a whole has become more sensitized to the importance of protecting human rights for everyone.

Independently, religions are not in favor of women's rights. So is the majority of humanity not religious? Or is the heart really trumping religious "law"? (Or something else in your view?)

Mingling within Christianity, many women that I have spoken with do not think that there is an issue within their own church's (or denomination's) doctrinal stance. While they do not argue with women's marginalization within Christianity, they do take issue with it outside of the church walls.

Educating women could be a helpful beginning, yet many women that I know are afraid of making a mistake. If they are wrong, they will be thrown into hell fire. Therefore, it is safer to listen to the "person with the degree and the calling" than to get educated and make her own choice. Often that fear is compacted with the view that women are "more easily beguiled". Women are invalidated and learn not to trust themselves in any way at all.

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure that religious issues can be blamed on gender issues, but maybe the solution is looking at it the other way around and is what is happening. First society took a turn toward more freedom for women (and I am talking world wide - not locally for me), and now it has taken a few steps back -- that is to be expected. When those in control feel that they are loosing control, they will act out and enforce all the more. Yet the response to that is always further attention to human rights.

I am pulling into the light what might be a sacred cow -- the relevance of religious issues to the rights of women -- and maybe anything else.

Amie

[Me Again]

While it is true that some segments of the church have prohibited women from serving in certain capacities within the congregation (e.g., pastor), I still disagree with the sentiment that Christianity, in general, is somehow anti-woman. It was only within the Christian societal concept that women were given the opportunity for higher education, or even lower education.

And since most of us believe that the church "is reformed and ever reforming" (elsewise, we would not believe that development of theology is possible), we should be able to recognize that sometimes, even though things initially are not perfect, eventually the Christian society develops to the point that old sacred cows are destroyed in favor of a more biblical approach; e.g., women's voting rights and abolition. It was ministers who led the fight to end these practices, and they were successful.

Countries with a Christian history allow women to hold jobs or stay home, seek education or not, vote, choose their life partner, etc. Hell, it is only within Christian society where divorce takes place that the wives have any rights to property, or even to the children. In other male-dominated countries, the children belong to the man...period.

Again, I am not saying that Christian societies have always been perfect in this, or any other, regard. I am also not saying that every part of the church is on board with this, or even that those who are practice it perfectly. However, I am challenged that all that is positive has come to us from Christian society, and to continually lump us in with the societies of other religions is false.

One last thought - there is no such thing as an irreligious society - all societies have a religion, even if it is humanism (in today's sense-at one time Christianity was considered humanistic). The further a society goes from Christianity, the less liberating it is for women. One anecdotal example of this is Ayn Rand. She lived in a communist country (Russia) where she had no freedom. She escaped to America, and enjoyed the freedom to develop a philosophical system, write books, be interviewed on TV, etc. And yet, she was an atheist, who denied the God, and the society which were based on His laws. She "bit the hand that fed" her. Yet, today she is even more popular than when she was alive.

[ozark]

I agree. In the New Testament we see the foundation of women’s rights. We see it in the way Jesus treated women and in the writings of Paul. However, it is the meaning of the death, resurrection, and subsequent Parousia of Christ that make equality between men and women inevitable. Religions or philosophical systems that are not based upon the idea of grace often resist the idea that all are equal in the eyes of God.

[Amie]

Christianity is definitely among the least of the doctrinally negative attitudes concerning women. I strongly disagree that a lesser sentiment is not prevelant within Christianity. Sure we are "allowed" more and "given" more.

I couldn't agree more that the bible itself is foundation for our being even created equally as human beings and that Jesus sets the bar high as a leader and model. That is not typically mirrored within the religion of Christianity however.

I don't think that it is secular or humanist society leading the way, but society as a whole in one accord is far ahead of what you will find being taught to those same ever reforming and sorely lagging pews. For example, the "head of household" thing is extremely popular doctrinally within Christianity but it is not how it is actually lived at home and in society (considering rights in the workplace, rights per choice in marriage, etc.)

That's a heart issue -- men who love their wives as the person they are and consider their feelings. I appreciate my man loving me rather than considering me because a law tells him to and I think that you Ed and Doug are not loving your wives because of a law either -- but freely giving your heart and consideration. To credit doctrine is to detract from men like you imo.

Just list the denominations of Christianity and begin with the largest two (Baptist and Catholic) and take an honest look at the doctrine about women. I am not talking about how it is lived out, I'm talking about what is being taught.

Women are living what I would agree with y'all is the providential freedom through Christ, yet that is not the doctrine taught in churches at all. My point is then, why is how we live different than how we are taught? Again, I blame Jesus for the lifestyle -- the recognition of worth in claiming human rights, the owning a say so in decisions, etc. God through his son transformed the heart of humanity and doctrine will not destroy that.

Why is it that the "Christian" heart beats with more consciousness concerning that reality? It's a great thing and I would not minimize that. At the same time, I will not minimize the growth that still needs be made. It is the heart that leads -- and doctrine is lagging.

Amie

[ozark]

God through his son transformed the heart of humanity and doctrine will not destroy that.



I think that is the bottom line, and history is very slowly attesting to that fact. If a man looks at the cross and then thinks of a woman as less than himself, he has not really looked at the cross.

[Jack]

I think that is the bottom line, and history is very slowly attesting to that fact. If a man looks at the cross and then thinks of a woman as less than himself, he has not really looked at the cross.
__________________
Doug

That is so well said, Doug!

and I sadly I still think of the churches that would do well to apply the "women be silent" to their souls rather than half of their congregrants.

Jack

[Barry]

That is so well said, Doug!

and I sadly I still think of the churches that would do well to apply the "women be silent" to their souls rather than half of their congregrants.

Jack

Well said, IMHO.
Barry