Should women be ordained

Colin Powell is a rarity, an exception. 1 black person in a position of power is contrasted by 100 white men with similar positions. If everything were equal it should resemble the ACTUAL percentages of people in the country. Meaning if 25% of the population are black, close to 25% of our leaders should be, ideally. You and I both know this is not even close to being true.
 
If 100% percentage of a minority (hispanic, black, whatever) population voted then we would have a roughly even representation.  
But hardly anybody votes anymore, I'm pretty sure voter turn out is below 50%.  You see, our government doesn't have representation for everybody in the country, it has representation for every voter in the country.  
IMO that's a good thing, if you can't take an hour out of your year to participate in government you don't deserve to be represented.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Tom Kazansky @ Dec. 15 2002,7:01)]
Click to expand...
(Tom) Timothy was assigned a specific area to teach in, wasn't he? I know it wasn't modern Western society though, that's for sure.

(Me) Consistently applying this standard, then, are we to say that nothing in the epistles should be accepted by any of us today? I would also appreciate an answer on my point regarding Paul's argument, which was based on the example of Adam and Eve -- which has universal application. How can I not make the very argument to you that Paul made to Timothy, as Paul's grounds are applicable beyond that local case?


(Tom) Fulfill the Law, yes, but is it wrong to wear my 50% polyester/50% cotton t-shirt?

(Me) That is clearly principle vs. specific application. Given that the OT teachings on gender roles are mirrored in the NT (see any passage on men and women), we have every reason to think that the roles themselves are absolute principles.
Soli Deo Gloria
 
Before I begin I just want to apologize to you Mustard.  It's not that I don't believe you, but I found it difficult to fathom that anyone could take losing a job(or not getting one) because of their race and "keep it in perspective"(especially when it's unjust).  Sorry if you took it the wrong way, I did not mean it as an insult or anything.  I guess I got a little overzealous hehe ;).  Eon, you're right that people probably havn't lost their jobs, but they surely have been prevented from obtaining them simply because of the colour of their skin, which I think we both can agree is racism.  The reason I said, "would you give up your job", was just to see how consistent you really were with your belief in this frivolous policy. Having said that, I'm surprised that you seem to find it ok to be descriminated against in the job market, but at least your consistent with your opinion, as you always are ;).

As for Secretary of State Colin Powell being a rarity,  well, you have to let progress work itself in.  How many secretaries of state were members of the minority before Powell?  Is that not progress?  Is that not "catching up"?  A 30 mile run begins with the first few steps.  Things will not happen in an instant, and we don't need affirmitive action forcing it to for us.  We need people to work hard and earn what they get(not that they aren't already, but you know what I mean).
 
Actually I agree, I think the idea behind affirmative action was to help the process in a temporary way. California was the first state to implement quota's for ethnicities in colleges and the workplace, and it was also the first to get rid of them. Affirmative action IS racism and should NOT be a permanent policy. It's a stepping stone that we will pass over.
 
I agree... But like taking any course of medicine, it's not enough to swallow the first pill and then declare yourself cured. There are 29 more pills to swallow, and the sooner they're taken the sooner we can come off them.

As I said earlier - in an IDEAL world Affirmative Action would not be needed.
 
Well, I'll ask another question than, for you affirmitive action supporters.

Why should I be descriminated against for a job? What have a, an 18 YEAR OLD WHITE CANADIAN, EVER done to deserve racial descrimination?
 
your canadian enough said
tounge.gif
 
Nothing... You deserve a fair crack, just like everyone else. Unfortunately, with things the way they are now, you have an unfair advantage. Affirmative Action is there to counter that advantage.
 
Balony I have an unfair advantage!  For the sake of argument I'm going to pretend like I do, so please explain how AA is balancing the field, if all it does is shift who has the advantage?  Furthermore, what kind of message is AA sending people who benefit from it?
 
Wow this went from do you think women should be pastors to an AA show down.Just a small swing dont you think=).As for the initial question, I will have to say no they should not be.My basis for this is not inequality, for as we all know the Bible clearly states that men and women are equal in God's eyes, the Bible also states that women are to teach other women and teach their children about God. However, when it comes to teaching over an assembly of the church when men are present, the Bible clearly states that women are not to teach or excersise authority over a man.The church where I attend just did a complete study on this subject and it was very indepth on the timelessness of this lesson in the Bible. The argument of it was a different time and different situation is most always disproved when it comes to the teachings of the Bible.
 
Uhuh... Unless where you live is VERY different to where I live, you need to check how many CEO's are black. How many managers are women? Do I need to go on?

If White Males are 60% of the workforce, then White Males should have 60% of those slots. Do they? No!

Affirmative action only assures that a certain PERCENTAGE of the slots are filled by minorities - it doesn't give minorities a boost OVERALL. If a company is over its quota, it doesn't have to hire anyone based on racial grounds.
 
Affirmitive Action is not a cure, it's demagogery. Racial descrimination is wrong in all forms, even if it's against whites. As for the "how many black CEOs" argument my response is this. Don't companies like choosing their best and most capable employees to take over their CEO positions? If the best person for the job is a white male, what's wrong with a company choosing him to lead their company if they believe it will lead to the best results?
 
What if they just choose him because they were in Delta Kappa Tau together at College? Or because he's the son of their cousin? Or because he reminds them of themselves?

Please - you know how much nepotism is at work in the business world.
 
What if the nepotism is conducted by minority groups, is it ok then?
 
See, the funny thing about Affirmative Action is, that the more equality minorities get, the less it serves to protect them. If there is a 20% quota on Blacks at all levels of the workforce, and 30% of the workforce is black, then Affirmative Action no longer takes effect. It isn't like it's a system that could one day remove all Whites from the workforce - it'll just ensure that everyone gets a fair crack of the whip, that's all.

What are you afraid of?
 
A fair crack at the whip is telling people to fight hard and earn what they get.  What am I afraid of?  Ask anyone who knows me, and they'll tell you I work darn hard to earn what I get.  Affirmitive action threatens my employment options because companies will be hesitant to hire me SOLELY BASED ON MY RACE.  I'm sorry Eon, but that is descrimination in the highest degree, and I can't believe that the champions of equity keep supporting this nonsense.  You don't need affirmitive action, you need good schooling, and a work ethic.  And a note for all you who want to accuse me of being a biggot, I'm not saying minorities do no work, I'm saying that AA gives them an unfair advantage, and the way that everyone should be employed is based on qualifications, not company quotas.
 
<shrugs> But without AA what you end up with is an underclass. In fact, AA was developed in RESPONSE to just such a situation. It is incumbent upon society to give ALL its citizens a fair and equal chance - despite themselves, sometimes.

If employers were playing fair and simply hiring the best qualified candidate then there would be no NEED for AA - hopefully, by the time that people from OUR generation are steering hiring policies we can do away with it.
 
Oh come on man, companies DO hire the best man for the job, you and I BOTH know that!  The only people who don't seem to think so, or just don't want to admit it, are the AA supporters.
 
I think what we have here is a comms disconnect. I don't see how we can move forward in anyway - because I firmly believe the one thing and you firmly believe the other.

I suppose we can start looking into statistics and proving our positions - but as the first statistics I'd grab would be the percentage of minorities and women in management roles, I can see us going back into a circular argument.

The hell with it - it's Yule, I'm going away for a fortnight anyway...
smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top