Wednesday, January 26, 2011

A good reason why women should not be "in" theology.

Abominable. Any person who can so snidely and wickedly weigh in against the "problems" of making abortion illegal does not deserve to bear the title of "theologian". These women are a disgrace to the cause of theology, and they further my already conclusive thesis that women have no business teaching the subject.

Jim West was correct to compare the abortion movement to the "Holocaust". Much worse yet than holocaust, abortion signifies sinning against little ones, an evil which stands so far above any act of genocide in its inherent repugnance, that the scriptures reserve no mercy for those nations which are guilty of it. Not even Judah, after all of its heartfelt repentance, escaped God's fierce and agonous wrath for the crimes of Manasseh in sacrificing children in the fire.

I can already predict that the only reaction this blog will get out of people is against its "chauvinist" bent. Oh what a damnable society we live in! We get all out of sorts when grown women aren't given their due in one sector of the academic realm, but can hardly bat an eye at the millions and millions and millions of babies that have been liquified by saline products under the "troubled" consent of their depraved and irresponsible mothers. What the hell is wrong with you? I can hardly contain my rage at your dull and wretched liberalism.

Women or men or anyone who support abortion, who even consider the matter a topic for debate....I hold them in as much esteem as the most foul and disgusting Nazi. Our country is no better than the third reich.


Theophilus said...

Seriously man, relax. Is it not allowed to discuss politics? Banning abortion is a problem, not because it would be a bad thing, but because it would be difficult. That's what the author said. Try reading it again.

And to slander all women as being pro-abortion on the grounds of one ambiguous blog post is utterly insane. Your chauvinism is flying proudly right now, as you grasp at straws to "prove" your points.

Richy said...

Hey Marc,

However abominable the attitudes of certain women may with regards to abortion, I don't think that it is somehow an indication that women shouldn't be "in" theology. Perhaps there are different reasons, but most certainly not the one you list here. You will find men that will express this same sentiment, and I can assure you that their abominability is not due to their gender, but to their humanly wicked heart.

I have read stuff by men explaining why it can be a "good" and "beautiful" and "loving" thing for children to be in sexual relationships with old men. I can assure you that these men should be banned from doing theology. But on account of what? On account of their own strange priorities and blasphemies? Should we therefore say that men should not do theology? I don't think we can move from the particular to the universal so quickly.

In any case, I do not wish to take away from the seriousness of the moral situation or the irritation that that article causes me. God help us all.


Emerson Fast said...

My post was directed against the mission statement of these women:

"The original concept was developed in response to the realization that discussions of women in religion constitute something of a void on the Internet. We hope to contribute to filling this void." - Go to the link "About" on the home page.

These women recognize a theological void that is gender-related and seek to fill this void. But they haven't filled the void. I don't recognize their murderous and depraved whining about the "difficulties" of putting a stop to infanticide as even remotely theological. God doesn't recognize it. Satan does, since he is a murderer from the beginning and wishes to promote all of his lies in the name of the Light. They are serving the purposes of Satan and thus are demonologians, which is something quite different from a theologian.

Theo, don't tell me to relax. I have every right to be riled up about the stubborn complacency of these wicked blasphemers as they perpetuate a sin in our culture which may very well be beyond redemption. The fact that you are only disconcerted with my "chauvinism" (procured by the "straws" of women supporting systematic infant murder) proves my very solemn point.

Richy, the blog of "women in theology" is an incidental case which supports my larger point. Whether these women like it or not, they are representing the "void-filler" of female-oriented "theology". And, as I pointed out in a previous post, they have directly proved that women are incapable of teaching the things of God, for like Eve, they lack the ability to avoid deception and thus only serve by leading communities astray. "It was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."

That there are men who are guilty of promoting abortion in "theological" camps serves Paul's other point; that a teacher of the Word should be blameless or he is not worthy of the post.