What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief?

BDBoop

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
35,384
Reaction score
5,446
Points
668
Location
Don't harsh my zen, Jen!
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

Let me go out on a limb here and say that Michele Bachmann is not going to become president. After all, as recently as 2007 some 30 percent of Republicans believed in evolution, so there must still be a few members of the reality-based community in there. Against much evidence, I continue to believe that the American people are not insane. But just in case I’m wrong, let me be the first to say it: only in America would the first female president be a woman who has promised to obey her man as Christ’s representative on earth—and only in America would there be a debate about whether a such a woman can be a feminist. Yes, we are that screwed up. Naomi Wolf, for example, claims that reactionaries like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are the real feminists today. “The core of feminism is individual choice and freedom,” she wrote recently, “and it is these strains that are being sounded now more by the Tea Party movement than by the left.” Take that, Gloria Steinem! If it’s hard to square “individual choice and freedom” with banning abortion, as Palin and Bachmann would like (and think how big a nanny state you’d need to accomplish that!), it’s even harder to square feminism with wifely obedience to a husband as God’s mouthpiece.

So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Liberal Christians have various ways of reinterpreting Ephesians 5:22, which exhorts women to “submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” They note that St. Paul also enjoins husbands to love their wives, and may not have even written the passage, and is not, as Bachmann seems to think, “the Lord.” But unfortunately, there are numerous other passages that support wifely submission: Colossians 3, Titus 2:5 and I Peter 3:1. “To love,” anyway, is not parallel with “to submit,” any more than “respect” is a synonym for “submission.” And then there is that pesky business of identifying men with Christ and women with the church, i.e., Christ’s worshipers, those lowly mortals he came to redeem from sin. I just don’t see how you can get to equality from there.
 
Last edited:

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,532
Reaction score
16,079
Points
2,180
Well, you are a special kind of dumb. that's for damn sure.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
273
Reaction score
40
Points
16
Location
" Evegreen State"
From Bush to Bachmann...........Repubs. lose pride.
 

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,094
Points
245
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

Let me go out on a limb here and say that Michele Bachmann is not going to become president. After all, as recently as 2007 some 30 percent of Republicans believed in evolution, so there must still be a few members of the reality-based community in there. Against much evidence, I continue to believe that the American people are not insane. But just in case I’m wrong, let me be the first to say it: only in America would the first female president be a woman who has promised to obey her man as Christ’s representative on earth—and only in America would there be a debate about whether a such a woman can be a feminist. Yes, we are that screwed up. Naomi Wolf, for example, claims that reactionaries like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are the real feminists today. “The core of feminism is individual choice and freedom,” she wrote recently, “and it is these strains that are being sounded now more by the Tea Party movement than by the left.” Take that, Gloria Steinem! If it’s hard to square “individual choice and freedom” with banning abortion, as Palin and Bachmann would like (and think how big a nanny state you’d need to accomplish that!), it’s even harder to square feminism with wifely obedience to a husband as God’s mouthpiece.
So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Liberal Christians have various ways of reinterpreting Ephesians 5:22, which exhorts women to “submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” They note that St. Paul also enjoins husbands to love their wives, and may not have even written the passage, and is not, as Bachmann seems to think, “the Lord.” But unfortunately, there are numerous other passages that support wifely submission: Colossians 3, Titus 2:5 and I Peter 3:1. “To love,” anyway, is not parallel with “to submit,” any more than “respect” is a synonym for “submission.” And then there is that pesky business of identifying men with Christ and women with the church, i.e., Christ’s worshipers, those lowly mortals he came to redeem from sin. I just don’t see how you can get to equality from there.

Only a complete ignoramus would think that Ephesians is about anything less than mutual respect.
 

Soggy in NOLA

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
40,569
Reaction score
5,355
Points
1,830
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

Let me go out on a limb here and say that Michele Bachmann is not going to become president. After all, as recently as 2007 some 30 percent of Republicans believed in evolution, so there must still be a few members of the reality-based community in there. Against much evidence, I continue to believe that the American people are not insane. But just in case I’m wrong, let me be the first to say it: only in America would the first female president be a woman who has promised to obey her man as Christ’s representative on earth—and only in America would there be a debate about whether a such a woman can be a feminist. Yes, we are that screwed up. Naomi Wolf, for example, claims that reactionaries like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are the real feminists today. “The core of feminism is individual choice and freedom,” she wrote recently, “and it is these strains that are being sounded now more by the Tea Party movement than by the left.” Take that, Gloria Steinem! If it’s hard to square “individual choice and freedom” with banning abortion, as Palin and Bachmann would like (and think how big a nanny state you’d need to accomplish that!), it’s even harder to square feminism with wifely obedience to a husband as God’s mouthpiece.

So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Liberal Christians have various ways of reinterpreting Ephesians 5:22, which exhorts women to “submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” They note that St. Paul also enjoins husbands to love their wives, and may not have even written the passage, and is not, as Bachmann seems to think, “the Lord.” But unfortunately, there are numerous other passages that support wifely submission: Colossians 3, Titus 2:5 and I Peter 3:1. “To love,” anyway, is not parallel with “to submit,” any more than “respect” is a synonym for “submission.” And then there is that pesky business of identifying men with Christ and women with the church, i.e., Christ’s worshipers, those lowly mortals he came to redeem from sin. I just don’t see how you can get to equality from there.

A few decades? Quite the go-getter there huh?

:lol:
 

percysunshine

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
31,748
Reaction score
7,816
Points
1,130
Location
Sty
Why do liberals hate women? They took out Hillary, they took out Palin, they are attacking Bachmann...it is befuddling.
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,915
Points
48
Location
My Shack
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

Let me go out on a limb here and say that Michele Bachmann is not going to become president. After all, as recently as 2007 some 30 percent of Republicans believed in evolution, so there must still be a few members of the reality-based community in there. Against much evidence, I continue to believe that the American people are not insane. But just in case I’m wrong, let me be the first to say it: only in America would the first female president be a woman who has promised to obey her man as Christ’s representative on earth—and only in America would there be a debate about whether a such a woman can be a feminist. Yes, we are that screwed up. Naomi Wolf, for example, claims that reactionaries like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are the real feminists today. “The core of feminism is individual choice and freedom,” she wrote recently, “and it is these strains that are being sounded now more by the Tea Party movement than by the left.” Take that, Gloria Steinem! If it’s hard to square “individual choice and freedom” with banning abortion, as Palin and Bachmann would like (and think how big a nanny state you’d need to accomplish that!), it’s even harder to square feminism with wifely obedience to a husband as God’s mouthpiece.
So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Liberal Christians have various ways of reinterpreting Ephesians 5:22, which exhorts women to “submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” They note that St. Paul also enjoins husbands to love their wives, and may not have even written the passage, and is not, as Bachmann seems to think, “the Lord.” But unfortunately, there are numerous other passages that support wifely submission: Colossians 3, Titus 2:5 and I Peter 3:1. “To love,” anyway, is not parallel with “to submit,” any more than “respect” is a synonym for “submission.” And then there is that pesky business of identifying men with Christ and women with the church, i.e., Christ’s worshipers, those lowly mortals he came to redeem from sin. I just don’t see how you can get to equality from there.

Only a complete ignoramus would think that Ephesians is about anything less than mutual respect.

So all baptists are ignoramus's? Not sure about the plural ignorami?
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,915
Points
48
Location
My Shack
Why do liberals hate women? They took out Hillary, they took out Palin, they are attacking Bachmann...it is befuddling.

Rush and many republicans worked hard to take out Hillary becuase they though she would win.
Forget all that already?

I would have voted Hillary but she was already out by the time my state got to vote in the primary. mid May.
 

Gadawg73

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
14,426
Reaction score
1,617
Points
155
Location
Georgia
Why do liberals hate women? They took out Hillary, they took out Palin, they are attacking Bachmann...it is befuddling.

I am not a liberal and do not hate women.
Hillary? Smart woman that is doing a good job at State. Would never vote for her for anything.
Palin? Nice woman, good mother and I agree with many of her views. I like her as she is a genuine person. Not presidential material. The fact that Obama is not a good President has nothing to do with Palin not being presidential material.
Bachmann? KOOK. Bat shit crazy.
 
Last edited:

shintao

Take Down ~ Tap Out
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
7,231
Reaction score
361
Points
83
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

Let me go out on a limb here and say that Michele Bachmann is not going to become president. After all, as recently as 2007 some 30 percent of Republicans believed in evolution, so there must still be a few members of the reality-based community in there. Against much evidence, I continue to believe that the American people are not insane. But just in case I’m wrong, let me be the first to say it: only in America would the first female president be a woman who has promised to obey her man as Christ’s representative on earth—and only in America would there be a debate about whether a such a woman can be a feminist. Yes, we are that screwed up. Naomi Wolf, for example, claims that reactionaries like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are the real feminists today. “The core of feminism is individual choice and freedom,” she wrote recently, “and it is these strains that are being sounded now more by the Tea Party movement than by the left.” Take that, Gloria Steinem! If it’s hard to square “individual choice and freedom” with banning abortion, as Palin and Bachmann would like (and think how big a nanny state you’d need to accomplish that!), it’s even harder to square feminism with wifely obedience to a husband as God’s mouthpiece.

So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Liberal Christians have various ways of reinterpreting Ephesians 5:22, which exhorts women to “submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” They note that St. Paul also enjoins husbands to love their wives, and may not have even written the passage, and is not, as Bachmann seems to think, “the Lord.” But unfortunately, there are numerous other passages that support wifely submission: Colossians 3, Titus 2:5 and I Peter 3:1. “To love,” anyway, is not parallel with “to submit,” any more than “respect” is a synonym for “submission.” And then there is that pesky business of identifying men with Christ and women with the church, i.e., Christ’s worshipers, those lowly mortals he came to redeem from sin. I just don’t see how you can get to equality from there.

Accept my deepest sympathy, my abused child. I was thinking this just this morning, if I put a sign on my front door, "What would it say?"

Please, no soliciting: I have my own god, own vacuum cleaner, own alarm system, and don't buy girl scout cookies. My door bell is disconnected, and I only answer the door on Halloween night between 6 & 10:00.
 

shintao

Take Down ~ Tap Out
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
7,231
Reaction score
361
Points
83
Why do liberals hate women? They took out Hillary, they took out Palin, they are attacking Bachmann...it is befuddling.

Hey, wouldn't it suck to hate women so bad you would take away their freedom of choice?:eusa_whistle:
 

percysunshine

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
31,748
Reaction score
7,816
Points
1,130
Location
Sty
Why do liberals hate women? They took out Hillary, they took out Palin, they are attacking Bachmann...it is befuddling.

Hey, wouldn't it suck to hate women so bad you would take away their freedom of choice?:eusa_whistle:

I thought we hired Joe Biden to answer that one.

The guy is coasting, on the job.
 

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,094
Points
245
Michele Bachmann, Wife in Chief? | The Nation

So much malarkey. I spent a few decades in a fundamentalist Christian home. You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to buy that "it's just mutual respect."

More;

Only a complete ignoramus would think that Ephesians is about anything less than mutual respect.

So all baptists are ignoramus's? Not sure about the plural ignorami?

You really want to try and tell me that all Baptists think women should kiss the feet of their husbands?
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,915
Points
48
Location
My Shack

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$132.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top