Wives must be subordinate to their husbands

  • News
  • Thread starter pelastration
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses concerns about the potential impact of a second term for President Bush, particularly in regards to the Supreme Court and appointments made by him. There is mention of specific judges who have controversial views, and a discussion about the potential effects on women's rights. The conversation also touches on the idea of fear mongering versus reality, and how this issue may be viewed in the state of Utah.
  • #1
pelastration
165
0
Will USA go back to the Middle Ages when Bush (flop-flop) wins. Ain't that good news for all women (kat and daughters, Evo, ...)?

Quote from: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/opinion/17sun1.html

"We have specific fears about what would happen in a second Bush term, particularly regarding the Supreme Court. The record so far gives us plenty of cause for worry.

Thanks to Mr. Bush, Jay Bybee, the author of an infamous Justice Department memo justifying the use of torture as an interrogation technique, is now a federal appeals court judge.

Another Bush selection, J. Leon Holmes, a federal judge in Arkansas, has written that wives must be subordinate to their husbands and compared abortion rights activists to Nazis."
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Talk about fear mongering.
 
  • #3
The difference between fear mongering and reality is getting clouded these days.
 
  • #4
Yes, you're right. Bush will inact a social revolution and women will just go with it because they have to!
 
  • #5
phatmonky said:
Yes, you're right. Bush will inact a social revolution and women will just go with it because they have to!

And how would this argument apply in the state of Utah ?

(I'm not agreeing with the original post, but I don't think you have to drastically change things overnight to make something head in the wrong direction.)
 

1. Is it still relevant for wives to be subordinate to their husbands in modern society?

No, the idea that wives must be subordinate to their husbands is outdated and goes against the principles of gender equality. In modern society, relationships should be based on mutual respect and partnership rather than one person being dominant over the other.

2. Where does the belief that wives must be subordinate to their husbands come from?

This belief has roots in traditional gender roles and patriarchal societies, where men were considered the head of the household and women were expected to fulfill domestic duties and be obedient to their husbands.

3. Does being subordinate mean that wives have to do whatever their husbands say?

No, being subordinate does not mean blind obedience. It means showing respect and considering your partner's opinions and decisions. In a healthy relationship, both partners should have equal say and decision-making power.

4. Can a husband and wife have an equal relationship if the wife is subordinate?

No, a relationship cannot be truly equal if one partner is seen as subordinate to the other. A healthy and equal relationship is based on mutual respect, shared decision-making, and support for each other's individual autonomy.

5. Are there any benefits to having a subordinate wife in a marriage?

No, there are no benefits to having a subordinate wife in a marriage. In fact, it can lead to power imbalances, lack of communication, and ultimately, an unhealthy and unhappy relationship for both partners.

Similar threads

Replies
129
Views
9K
Replies
211
Views
23K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
4K
Back
Top