I don't object to any of this, it makes complete sense to me. But I am a Christian who believes the Bible is the Word of God. In that Bible are many verses that declare the same, I am his responsibility.
We see an example of this when Sarah was in her tent laughing at the thought of bearing a child. Imagine that. God's talking to your husband and you are rolling your eyes laughing at what He's saying is going to happen. SARAH!!! He was talking to GOD! Now, I've got to believe this was a bit embarrassing to Abraham when the following happened:
And the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I surely bear a child, since I am old?’ Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.”Who among you Christian wives would not have gotten a pretty stern talking to later on from your husbands? It's one thing when we are being rebellious twits in the privacy of our own home, it's very ill advised to ever do so in public, but to do so when GOD is talking to our husband? That's a whole different level of disrespect.
But Sarah denied it, saying, “I did not laugh,” for she was afraid.
And He said, “No, but you did laugh!” - Genesis 18:13-15
Or is it? Tell me when God doesn't know you've laughed, tell me when He doesn't know when your eyes are rolling and you're giving your husband a derisive look. Should He be interested to, who would God ask about this behavior of yours? God was not asking Abraham something He did not know, His question to Abraham was His holding Abraham to account for his wife.
And let's not forget the disciplinary action a wife's behavior can bring upon her husband:
17Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’:“Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
18 Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.” - Genesis 3:17-19
The more I think about these things, the more convinced I am woman are not moral agents and should be returned to the legal position of property, either their fathers, or closest male blood relative or the property of their husband. Rape would then also be a crime against the property rights of the man who owns her.I'm not emotional about it. It's something that makes complete sense to me. I live my life this way.
I absolutely love what Stingray had to say in response to Frank when he inquired:
BTW, how many single women out there are willing to be relegated to property status for the sake of a stable marriage? - Frank
Ahhhhh . . . If women would only take a moment to think about and understand how incredibly well men care for, cherish and love their property. Diapers for sports cars, anyone? - StingrayTurns out, if you believe as I do, live your life as I do, or defend those who do, you are not welcome on Susan Walsh's blog.
I am not making any assumptions. Here is a quote from SSM’s site which nicely displays her attitudes about women, which dovetail with the Taliban:In an earlier comment she refers to women like myself and SSM as self loathing. (She actually calls us "self-loathing wives of cheaters" - it is unclear why she believes me to be a wife of a cheater, but for the record, RLB has never been unfaithful to me. It hardly matters, however, her disdain for SSM having forgiven her husband is more than a little peculiar.)
Ton: The more I think about these things, the more convinced I am woman are not moral agents and should be returned to the legal position of property, either their fathers, or closest male blood relative or the property of their husband. Rape would then also be a crime against the property rights of the man who owns her.Let’s see Escoffier defend that.
Sarah’s Daughter: Amen
Sunshine Mary: [ssm: I second that amen!]
Do you defend it?
(I need to know so I can ban appropriately)
My question to Susan and other women who would make such statements is, why the hyperbole?
Why say our beliefs/way we live our lives dovetail with the Taliban? They demonstrably do not.
Why not call it as it is. We live our lives in accordance with the Bible and have no qualms about it. I do not know anything about this woman or any faith or belief in God she may have, but clearly she is not interested at all in discussion with Bible believing Christian women.
Of course she knows nothing of my life and is hardly qualified to say I am self-loathing. It actually makes me chuckle. Those who know me personally know why. I'm quite positive women like this are uninterested to actually know how our life works. The unbelievable provision I enjoy, the laughter and joy in our home, the trust my husband has in me (I've held a durable power of attorney for years - you lawyerly types know what this means, especially in today's society) etc. None of this would make a bit of difference.
But for those of you who are of the opinion that my beliefs, my obedience to God's command to submit to my husband, my living life with the Bible as my moral foundation, are archaic and indicative of me being self-loathing, just say that. No need to compare my life to the Taliban. Go ahead. Call it what it is. Say what you so badly want to say. You reject biblical teaching and deny that it is the Word of God and the Truth. It's okay, what are you afraid of?