Would the world be more morally governed if it were run by women?

Would the world be more morally governed if it were run by women?

  • Yes, more moral

    Votes: 1 5.6%
  • No, less moral

    Votes: 5 27.8%
  • No change, it'd be the same

    Votes: 12 66.7%

  • Total voters
    18
It might well be less violent and overtly aggressive. More cattiness and less macho blustering, very likely. But in terms of morality (in, say, the Kantian sense of always treating others and ends in themselves and never merely as means), probably not.
 
Not much more besides the thread title, but more morally governed by woman rather than how it's currently run by almost all men?

See, you asked a question that could have been phrased better. Instead of asking a moral question, maybe you should have asked "would the world be better under a patriarchical or a matriarchal society"?

Morals are way too subjective, because it depends on your religion and location. Personally, I don't think Christians are any more "moral" than anyone else, in some cases, I believe less so. I mean..........the "moral family values party" has had it's share of scandals involving sex.

Besides, who here thinks that Palin is "moral" in her quest for greed? Me personally? I think she's an idiot.

However, with all that being said, yes, I do think that society would be better under a matriarchal society, because women have more of a tendency towards compromise and diplomacy.
 
Last edited:
See I disagree, I think it'd be better. We men have egos, and that most certainly goes into how the world's governors make their decisions. Not that women don't have egos, but not usually on the level of men.


Plus they have a more natural nurturing instinct as mothers, for instance it seems more likely for a woman to love her children than a man.

It might be better in some ways but worse in others, you said women are more nurturing than men, you are correct so that could mean we would be pumping even more money into countries in Africa like Somalia and fighting wars in countries like the Congo where women are raped in record levels.

I would go for that.

Instead of fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we would be imbedded in places like Burma, the Congo and Somalia, and we would still have troubles with the Middle East because they don't have any womens rights.
 
Not much more besides the thread title, but more morally governed by woman rather than how it's currently run by almost all men?

Remember cleopatra.

Can you imagine women suffering from hot flashes in control of nuclear bombs :lol:

Screwing with Gods chain of command has consequences.

Gods chain of command?



Oh boy....................................




:cuckoo:

:lol:

Well look what happened when adam allowed eve to lead.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the question.

What do you mean by "more morally governed?"

More laws imposing morality

Or

Leadership that holds itself to a higher standard of morality
 
I don't understand the question.

What do you mean by "more morally governed?"

More laws imposing morality

Or

Leadership that holds itself to a higher standard of morality

You may wish to also ask, WHOSE moral standard? Islam? Christianity? Judaic? Zen?

Or, would you prefer the morals of a Shaker or an Amish person?

"Morals" are HIGHLY subjective.
 
The bible is very clear that women are supposed to be subservient to the men.
Therefore all women in power are not real christians.

btw that requirement is one small part of why I am an atheist.
 
Not much more besides the thread title, but more morally governed by woman rather than how it's currently run by almost all men?

See, you asked a question that could have been phrased better. Instead of asking a moral question, maybe you should have asked "would the world be better under a patriarchical or a matriarchal society"?

Morals are way too subjective, because it depends on your religion and location. Personally, I don't think Christians are any more "moral" than anyone else, in some cases, I believe less so. I mean..........the "moral family values party" has had it's share of scandals involving sex.

Besides, who here thinks that Palin is "moral" in her quest for greed? Me personally? I think she's an idiot.

However, with all that being said, yes, I do think that society would be better under a matriarchal society, because women have more of a tendency towards compromise and diplomacy.
WHAT A SURPRISE !!!:doubt:
 
I don't understand the question.

What do you mean by "more morally governed?"

More laws imposing morality

Or

Leadership that holds itself to a higher standard of morality

You may wish to also ask, WHOSE moral standard? Islam? Christianity? Judaic? Zen?

Or, would you prefer the morals of a Shaker or an Amish person?

"Morals" are HIGHLY subjective.
moral standards are not that difficult !! the left has been trying desperately to turn morality and truth into matters of opinion!!
 
I don't understand the question.

What do you mean by "more morally governed?"

More laws imposing morality

Or

Leadership that holds itself to a higher standard of morality

You may wish to also ask, WHOSE moral standard? Islam? Christianity? Judaic? Zen?

Or, would you prefer the morals of a Shaker or an Amish person?

"Morals" are HIGHLY subjective.
moral standards are not that difficult !! the left has been trying desperately to turn morality and truth into matters of opinion!!

Like I said, WHAT "moral" standards? Did you know that it is allowed to lie to those not of your faith if you're Islamic? It's called "taquiyya". Should we support Islamic standards of morals? That also means if you commit adultery, you are killed, usually by stoning.

What about the "moral" standards of India? Did you know that THERE gays are a legitimately recognized class? How's about some Hindu morals?

Or..............are you talking of the "moral" standards of Christianity? Those guys were really good. Ever heard of the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition?
 

Forum List

Back
Top