1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do Abrahamic Faiths Facilitate the Abuse Of Intimacy?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Sunstone, Jul 3, 2006.

?
  1. Yes they do.

    25.0%
  2. No they don't.

    75.0%
  3. Other or Depends.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. I'd like to abuse some ice cream right about now.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    71,520
    Ratings:
    +30,117
    Religion:
    Erotic Dancing Girls
    It has been claimed by some people that the Abrahamic faiths facilitate or encourage the abuse of intimacy. They assert that several factors might be responsible for this.

    For instance, the patriarchal nature of Judaism, Christianity and Islam facilitates abuse by setting up an unequal and unchecked relationship between the spouses. Again, such biblical passages as "spare the rod and spoil the child" encourage abuse. etc. etc. But are these critics right? Do the Abrahamic faiths facilitate and encourage the abuse of intimacy, such as the intimacy between a husband and wife, or the intimacy between a parent and child?

    If so, on what grounds do you make that claim? What is your reasoning here?

    If not, how do you respond to the charge that the faiths do indeed facilitate the abuse of intimacy?

    Is it reasonable to say that the Abrahamic faiths facilitate the abuse of intimacy more than such religions as Taoism and Buddhism?

    Does the subservient role of women in all three faiths lead to an unequal relation with their spouses that facilitates or encourages abuse?

    Does the patriarchal nature of all three religions facilitate or encourage the abuse of children?

    Comments?
     
  2. FerventGodSeeker

    FerventGodSeeker Believer

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,697
    Ratings:
    +150
    I cannot speak for all Abrahamic faiths, but I do not believe that Christianity facilitates abuse. You paraphrased a verse from the Old Testament (there's actually a few that are similar), e.g. :
    "The rod and rebuke give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother." Proverbs 29:15

    This verse does not encourage abuse, it encourages loving discipline.

    As for women/wives in Christianity, I think the alledged sexism in the Bible is over-stated. Consider these Biblical passages:
    "Houses and riches are an inheritance from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the LORD." Proverbs 19:14
    "Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth is far above rubies...Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing, but a woman who fears the LORD, she shall be praised." Proverbs 31:10, 30
    "So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself." Ephesians 5:28

    Critics of Christianity sometimes point to verses like,
    "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord." Colossians 3:18

    However, they forget that Christians are all supposed to submit to one another, it's not just a one-way street:
    "Yes, all of you be submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for "God resists the proud,but gives grace to the humble." " 1 Peter 5:5

    Hopefully this puts a little perspective on the issue.

    FerventGodSeeker
     
    • Like Like x 4
  3. evearael

    evearael Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    6,106
    Ratings:
    +744
    The man who raped and sexually assaulted me was of one of the Abrahamic faiths, but was not practicing and mostly ignorant of his faith.
     
  4. CaptainXeroid

    CaptainXeroid Following Christ

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    4,782
    Ratings:
    +755
    ...Um...NO. These critics aren't even in the same area code as 'right'. I think FGS answered it pretty well.

    I can understand how some people from a touchy-feely culture who do not believe children should be disciplined could so badly misinterpret that passage. Of course in their warped sense of entitlements, telling a child 'No!' to just about anything constitutes abuse.
     
  5. Faint

    Faint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,683
    Ratings:
    +358
    *cough* "To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you will bring forth children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you." (Gen. 3:16) *cough*
     
  6. Faint

    Faint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,683
    Ratings:
    +358
    Yeah, I think the Abrahamic faiths set the stage for misogyny (which tends to make healthy intimacy rather difficult)

    Some more examples (the Bible):

    Lot refuses to give up his angels to the perverted mob, offering his two "virgin daughters" instead. He tells the bunch of angel rapers to "do unto them [his daughters] as is good in your eyes." This is the same man that is called "just" and "righteous" in 2 Pet.2:7-8. 19:8

    Not a lot of value for the female kind, I'd say.

    (The Qu'ran)
    "Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme." (Dawood's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34)

    (this is not to mention the fact that God--the ultimate symbol of everything pure, great and wonderful--is a MALE. Makes it difficult for women to measure up eh?)
     
  7. almifkhar

    almifkhar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    985
    Ratings:
    +105
    um i am gona go with no on this. i will compare american society from the 1920's vs. that of our modern time right now.

    people in the 20's were way more god fearing then they are today. they believed in the bible (using this book because durring that time this was a dominate christian society) in a literal sense. as a result of this kind of thinking, children showed much respect to their parents, the social system left it up to the parents to raise their children with out interferrence and divorce rates/ single unwed mothers was almost unheard of. society was far more productive than it is today and i think that religion had a lot to do with it.

    today, divorce rates are sky high, children rule the home, the system interfers and will strip a parent of their rights for the simplest reasons, and society today is morally bankrupt. i think that a lack of religion has alot to do with this. today people want the holy books to be how they want them to be and this was not the purpose of them. these teachings were classic and are able to stay true throught the ages.

    children must obey their parents for it is the parents who prepare them for the future. women should honor and respect a man who is willing to marry, provide and care for her. THIS IS HIS JOB LADIES!!!!
    men should honor and respect women who are willing to share the burdens of life with them. OUR MOST SACRED JOB IS MOTHERHOOD!!!
    neghibors should be kinder to one another

    the bottom line is this, if our families fail, than society fails and this breeds everything that we are witnessing today, things such as, casual sex, selfishness, aphathy, coruption, and straight up lawlessness. this is what the teachings were preaching against. this is not how we should behave as human beings for it will destroy us as a whole in the end and history shows this to be true.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Faint

    Faint Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,683
    Ratings:
    +358
    Which society...the Nick At Nite version or the real one...?

    Women were also expected to stay at home, remain subserviant, "speak when spoken to", not enjoy sex (indeed, not THINK about sex), and not get divorced in favor of staying with an abusive husband, etc.

    What's wrong with being single and/or unwed?

    Divorce is common I think because people get married for stupid reasons. Religious "duty" is not excluded from this.

    Interesting. I'm not sure what you mean by this. Examples?

    Compared to the 1920's? Where are you getting your info? I guess WWI was pretty moral...I mean sending our boys out to kill people and all. Oh, and Flappers don't compare to drunken party girls today right. Not to mention the fact that NO one abused alcohol back then, due to prohibition and all that. AND we should take a lesson from that whole "whites only" segregation thing. I mean, who needs equal rights?


    I fail to see how casual sex is a terrible problem. Maybe you mean to say "unsafe" sex? Big difference.

    So the alternative is to take the Abrahmic texts literally again? I don't believe using books that advocate incest, slavery, violence, vengeance on the innocent, misogyny, rape, and murder of children will benefit society.
     
  9. almifkhar

    almifkhar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    985
    Ratings:
    +105
    alrighty so your in full disagreement great, then perhaps you can explain to me how and why we are in the situation we are in and what is the best way(in your opinion) to get out of the mess that we as a society has gotten ourselves into. apparently religious teachings just incourage all these horrible things that you just described. so instead should we take the attitude of i am going to live my life the way i want to and who cares about how it effects society? cause this is where we are at right now and it is not working.
     
  10. Feathers in Hair

    Feathers in Hair World's Tallest Hobbit

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    14,605
    Ratings:
    +1,796
    Certain members of Abrahamic traditions seem to view the Genesis story as being a guide to the 'heirarchy' of males and females. I wish I remembered the name of the study, but people were given a list of adjectives and were asked to 'sort' them by whether they applied to God or Mankind. Later, they were given the same list again, and were asked to sort them by if they applied to 'male' versus 'female.' Almost invariably, the adjectives associated with god were the ones associated with being male. The results presenting in this way are indicative that people see God being to Man as Man being to Woman.
     
  11. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,505
    Ratings:
    +1,298
    Religion:
    Christian
    I don't think that Abrahamic faiths facilitate the abuse of intimacy, they might be said to facilitate more, and possibly more intitmate, relationships, thus adding to the possiblity of entering an intimate relationship with an abusive person...

    They also have a heirarchal world-view which could accommadate an abusive person

    I don't really agree that such a 'test' is indicative of anything. I could quite easily come up with an adjective set were people would associate the majority of adjective with both God and women...
     
  12. Feathers in Hair

    Feathers in Hair World's Tallest Hobbit

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    14,605
    Ratings:
    +1,796
    That's true, but I don't think that the adjective set was made with the purpose of leaning toward one gender of the other. For example, when comparing 'strong' versus 'weak', most people would, based on Western thought and forced to choose, group God and man with the former and mankind and women with the latter.
     
  13. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,505
    Ratings:
    +1,298
    Religion:
    Christian
    Words like compassionate and loving though(I assume) would go to God and women as opposed to mankind and men. Cruel, malicious would goto mankind and men as opposde to God and women... that is all I was saying.... it all depends on what adjectives were in there...
     
  14. FerventGodSeeker

    FerventGodSeeker Believer

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,697
    Ratings:
    +150
    If you notice, that's in a list of curses on Eve (and females in general)...BAD things. In other words, a husband who "rules over" his wife negatively is a BAD THING *cough*. ;)

    FGS
     
  15. Quoth The Raven

    Quoth The Raven Half Arsed Muse

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,047
    Ratings:
    +734
    As opposed to one who 'rules over' his wife in her own best interests.:rolleyes:
     
Loading...