Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

So what is this toxic masculinity thing anyhow?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Mary had no valid claim to the English throne while the Tudor monarchy was still viable.
    Wrong. Mary had a weaker claim while a LEGITIMATE heir was available. Elizabeth was a bastard in the eyes of the Catholic church, and in the eyes of the Catholic members of Parliament. It was not until after Henry's death that the Third Succession Act was passed which allowed the illegitimate child of a divorced and remarried king to assume the throne.

    James succeeded Elizabeth I only because she was childless, through his great-grandmother Margaret Tudor, who was Henry VIII's elder sister. If Elisabeth had had a child, that child would have succeeded her (short of revolution) not James.
    Thanks to a change in the rule of succession, yes. But at the time of Henry VIII's death, Mary was third in line. Elizabeth had no place before the Protestants changed the rules.
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    - Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • This thread is starting to remind me of playing Crusader Kings II.
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
        That’s not the argument.....
        Because you keep dancing around and trying to change it. Go away. You're just another hate-filled anti-Christian bigot searching for significance.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
          That’s not the argument. The argument is that Christianity has historically reflected the moral values of the day.
          except that was not your argument. You merely accused Christians of oppressing women based on scripture for 2000 years. And you have been unable to provide any such support for your accusations.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            except that was not your argument. You merely accused Christians of oppressing women based on scripture for 2000 years. And you have been unable to provide any such support for your accusations.
            He doesn't have to provide support for it. All he need do is repeat it over and over and over until we get tired of responding.

            The boy found some anti-Christian fodder on an anti-Christian website, and he is duty bound to repeat it over and over and over...
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              He doesn't have to provide support for it. All he need do is repeat it over and over and over until we get tired of responding.

              The boy found some anti-Christian fodder on an anti-Christian website, and he is duty bound to repeat it over and over and over...
              And now that he realizes he was wrong, he is trying to change history and claim he was arguing something entirely different. As if nobody can just go back and read his past posts. He does that a lot too. Trying to gaslight people.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                Wrong. Mary had a weaker claim while a LEGITIMATE heir was available. Elizabeth was a bastard in the eyes of the Catholic church, and in the eyes of the Catholic members of Parliament.
                Catholicism was effectively illegal in England during Elizabeth’s rein.

                It was not until after Henry's death that the Third Succession Act was passed which allowed the illegitimate child of a divorced and remarried king to assume the throne.
                Incorrect. The Third Succession Act of King Henry VIII's reign was passed by the Parliament of England in July 1543, and returned both his daughters, Mary (daughter of Henry’s 1st wife) and Elizabeth, to the line of the succession behind their half-brother Edward. Note that the male had precedence even though Edward was only a young boy when he acceded to the throne. .

                Thanks to a change in the rule of succession, yes. But at the time of Henry VIII's death, Mary was third in line. Elizabeth had no place before the Protestants changed the rules.
                See above.
                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by seer View Post
                  You asked a silly question Tass:did society get it terribly wrong for all that time?
                  Inasmuch as Western society was dominated by Christianity it was Christians that got it so wrong by subjecting women to the authority of men, i.e. “wrong” according to the social mores of today, when women’s rights do matter.

                  First, there is no objective wrong or right in your world, there is just personal or collective opinion.
                  "Objective" wrong or right in your world depends entirely upon how it is interpreted. This is subjective and varies according to the social values of the day…as we’ve seen throughout history.

                  Second, time is not relevant, are Chimps terribly wrong today for acting as they do? And primitive behavior is no more objectively right or wrong than less primitive behavior.
                  Chimps are not wrong for acting as they do, it’s their nature, whereas human rules of behavior have evolved.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    except that was not your argument. You merely accused Christians of oppressing women based on scripture for 2000 years. And you have been unable to provide any such support for your accusations.
                    Inasmuch as Western society was dominated by Christianity it was Christians that oppressed women by subjecting them to the authority of men and using passages such as: “…encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands…” Titus 2:3-5. And “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” 1 Timothy 2:12…et al. In this they were following the Patriarchal tradition of Judaism, from whence Christianity emerged. This remained largely unchanged until the development of the Women's Rights Movements of recent years (comparatively), beginning with the Suffragette Movement.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                      Catholicism was effectively illegal in England during Elizabeth’s rein.
                      Even "effectively" seems something of an overstatement. The religious settlement act and all that held sway for the better part of the first 30 years of Elizabeth 1's reign. And the small matter of insurrection around the thirtieth year of her reign, at the instigation of the Pope and Jesuit missionaries, only led to a clamp down - it didn't get Catholicism banned even then - though "effectively" might reasonably be stated at that point.


                      Incorrect. The Third Succession Act of King Henry VIII's reign was passed by the Parliament of England in July 1543, and returned both his daughters, Mary (daughter of Henry’s 1st wife) and Elizabeth, to the line of the succession behind their half-brother Edward. Note that the male had precedence even though Edward was only a young boy when he acceded to the throne.
                      Actually, to line of succession after Henry's legitimate heirs (children born to his then current wife, Catherine). Mary and Elizabeth remained officially illegitimate, and were returned to succession on the basis of letters patent issued by Henry VIII or being nominated in his will - whoever was named in the will taking precedence. Had Henry nominated someone else as his successor in his will, neither would have acceded to the throne.
                      Last edited by tabibito; 03-16-2019, 12:46 AM.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Inasmuch as Western society was dominated by Christianity it was Christians that got it so wrong by subjecting women to the authority of men, i.e. “wrong” according to the social mores of today, when women’s rights do matter.
                        But that is not wrong in any objective sense, it is in fact how nature created us. Why do you hate nature so much?

                        Chimps are not wrong for acting as they do, it’s their nature, whereas human rules of behavior have evolved.
                        That is just silly Tass, for us to evolve morally there needs to be an objective standard that we are moving towards. If not no behavior is more evolved than another. "What ever is, is right."
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                          And now that he realizes he was wrong,
                          I really don't think he's capable of thinking he was wrong.

                          he is trying to change history and claim he was arguing something entirely different. As if nobody can just go back and read his past posts. He does that a lot too. Trying to gaslight people.
                          I think the boy is henpecked at home, so he tries to take it out on us.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                            Inasmuch as Western society was dominated by Christianity it was Christians that oppressed women by subjecting them to the authority of men and using passages such as: “…encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands…” Titus 2:3-5. And “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet” 1 Timothy 2:12…et al. In this they were following the Patriarchal tradition of Judaism, from whence Christianity emerged. This remained largely unchanged until the development of the Women's Rights Movements of recent years (comparatively), beginning with the Suffragette Movement.
                            And PRIOR to "two thousands years ago", women were equal with men in all respects, right?
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Inasmuch as Western society was dominated by Christianity it was Christians that oppressed women by subjecting them to the authority of men and using passages such as: “…encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands…” Titus 2:3-5.
                              And strangely - when it came to advocating a change to equal opportunities for women, women were as opposed to it as were men.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                And PRIOR to "two thousands years ago", women were equal with men in all respects, right?
                                I guess you missed the bit about Christians merely “following the Patriarchal tradition of Judaism, from whence Christianity emerged”. And, that “This remained largely unchanged until the development of the Women's Rights Movements of recent years (comparatively), beginning with the Suffragette Movement”.
                                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                159 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X