1 of 2
1
Moral men and women will deny women equal rights.
Posted: 13 November 2012 10:36 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10

Moral men and women will deny women equal rights.

Seeking and demanding sanctity is one of the main five best rules of morality. Those rules shown below closely resemble most religious rules. For humankind to give an idea sanctity they must give sacrifice to it. The sacrifice that we must all do is deny women equality and give men a lower position in rulership. Men must bend the knee to women and elevate them to our ultimate sovereign. Those women and men who do not demand this are not in the best moral state of mind and should try to move to it.

We are all natural animals and follow the hierarchical rules of those species which have Alpha males. The main survival strategy of such a species is that the Alpha males will fight to the death to insure that the Beta females live.

Females, as the incubators of life and the most important within that species, must have the highest protection to insure that they will survive to continue the life of that species. Men, being the most physically powerful and having a more natural tendency to rule, must take a leadership role to insure this continuity. The Alpha of any species fights to insure that the Beta always has the highest position. The Kings and all other men IOW, must rule as the power behind the throne but the Queen is the one who must always sit on that throne and rule over the King. 

The research done by Mr. Haigt shows that the right wings of religions and politics show more concern with tribalism than do the left wings. It appears then that if we are to move to the most advantageous moral position then it is to the right wings to promote it. As an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian, I am the left of center and not in the best camp to sell the view that women should rule even as I recognize that they should. The right has been given a wakeup call thanks to president Obama being re-elected. FMPOV then, the right needs a new platform if they are to survive, as they should to balance the political spectrum. 

Generally speaking only; women are the weaker of the sexes and are better places to know what the requirements of survival are and should thus rule. Women should then demand the full protection and sacrifice of the Alphas males as that is the natural order of hierarchical species and must be to insure survival. This sacrifice gives sanctity to our species and insures it’s longevity. The religious and political right seem better suited to lead towards this end.

In my opinion, men and women who do not agree with this premise are not taking the best moral position for families or for society at large. This issue is more in the hands of men than women and in that sense men would be more immoral than women if they do not deny women equality and place women above themselves. 

Should the religious and political right take up this best moral position and demand that equality be denied to all women and demand that they be given their rightful and natural position above men? 

Please see the research and logic behind this premise.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHc-yMcfAY4

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 November 2012 02:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  150
Joined  2012-07-25

Wow ! G i am, that is quite the opener ! With the potent mix of cheap energy and high technology I fail to see the advantage in mere physical strength ( big strong hairy dude drag small weak female into cave for ugh-ugh !) over intelligence. The way that I see things…..to lead is to take control….never is control given. Aggressiveness is not mere physical power….it much more complex and ephemeral.
I am just not sure of what you are proposing…...not a lot of time for going and searching your links…....but what you have written leaves me in the dark…...

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 November 2012 05:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
sine dues - 13 November 2012 02:55 PM

Wow ! G i am, that is quite the opener ! With the potent mix of cheap energy and high technology I fail to see the advantage in mere physical strength ( big strong hairy dude drag small weak female into cave for ugh-ugh !) over intelligence. The way that I see things…..to lead is to take control….never is control given. Aggressiveness is not mere physical power….it much more complex and ephemeral.
I am just not sure of what you are proposing…...not a lot of time for going and searching your links…....but what you have written leaves me in the dark…...

The religious right has been quite vocal against women of late and it likely was instrumental in losing them the election.
I hope they see this and re-think their foolish ways and go the other way. They have a role to play in both religion and politics but have to realize that we are in 2012 and not 112.

Further, all political systems have forgotten some of the fundamentals of both religion and government; like sanctity of women and the family and men are ruling for themselves and not family values anymore.

Women should accepts that they are more valuable overall than the male. They are the wombs of life and the backbone of the family that should be the first consideration of the males. 

Historically it has fallen to the males to be the warriors of society. I see no reason to change that and see reasons to maintain it and direct those efforts towards women. Sanctity says that they should know that the male ego should express itself in the protection of those that they care and fight for. Women and children.

Placing women above men saves their male ego and give men purpose and a place for pride. Women take more pride in family and they too need to have that outlet at that level and it is transferred to the greater society if she is Queen. She is the gatherer and that includes cities and states. Man is the hunter so let him hunt. Women have been oppressed forever and it is high time they were given justice with such affirmative action. Just men will agree.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 November 2012 08:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  150
Joined  2012-07-25

You are wrong ! It is equality or it is nothing. Are you so foolish that you think that GIVING women more rights makes it all better. You cannot GIVE rights. You must be willing to give up your life in order to enforce your rights. The takers will take…always….and always from the weak.
No one should accept that women are more valuable than men….silly ! You can’t have one with out the other….“they are the wombs of life” Yup! and with out men it is an empty womb indeed.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 November 2012 04:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Moral men and women will deny women equal rights.

Then they are being immoral.

Pretty simple when you think about it.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 November 2012 06:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5484
Joined  2010-06-16

I guess a question that arises is can insane people be either moral or immoral when they do insane things?

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 November 2012 11:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  419
Joined  2007-08-24

I came back to see how the forum survived the election and was called an incubator.  I have no hatched anything for years.  First election I’ve won in over a decade.  I’m pleased with the results.  Hope everyone is happy and healthy.

Sandy

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2012 02:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
sine dues - 15 November 2012 08:33 AM

You are wrong ! It is equality or it is nothing. Are you so foolish that you think that GIVING women more rights makes it all better. You cannot GIVE rights. You must be willing to give up your life in order to enforce your rights. The takers will take…always….and always from the weak.
No one should accept that women are more valuable than men….silly ! You can’t have one with out the other….“they are the wombs of life” Yup! and with out men it is an empty womb indeed.

I take it then that you do not believe in the law of the sea where women and children are given the first seats in the life boats.

Get on board with a coin then so that you can flip it against the females.

Join Captain Coward’s fan club.

Regards
DL

[ Edited: 28 November 2012 02:47 PM by Greatest I am ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2012 02:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 15 November 2012 04:46 PM

Moral men and women will deny women equal rights.

Then they are being immoral.

Pretty simple when you think about it.

Yep.

Is this your way of agreeing with the O P?
Kinda hard to tell.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2012 02:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Occam. - 15 November 2012 06:40 PM

I guess a question that arises is can insane people be either moral or immoral when they do insane things?

Occam

Mens rea, Latin for an evil mind, says no in our courts.

Eh. What do you plan on doing?

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2012 02:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Sandy Price - 17 November 2012 11:52 AM

I came back to see how the forum survived the election and was called an incubator.  I have no hatched anything for years.  First election I’ve won in over a decade.  I’m pleased with the results.  Hope everyone is happy and healthy.

Sandy

Congratulations.
Keeping that pretty face I see.

I could have used the bun in the basket thing but I am into mechanical gadgets and was at a loss for words.

Speaking of elections and voting, you might appreciate this quote that men put up in the Sufferjet days.
It was part of what I read on the law of women and children first to the lifeboats.

I damned near chocked on it but then I am a man. You may have a different reaction.

“there was no reason for women to vote since men would always put the interests of women ahead of their own interests.”“

Tell that to Captain Coward.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 10:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
sine dues - 15 November 2012 08:33 AM

You are wrong ! It is equality or it is nothing. Are you so foolish that you think that GIVING women more rights makes it all better. You cannot GIVE rights. You must be willing to give up your life in order to enforce your rights. The takers will take…always….and always from the weak.
No one should accept that women are more valuable than men….silly ! You can’t have one with out the other….“they are the wombs of life” Yup! and with out men it is an empty womb indeed.

Of course you can. Enough sperm can be frozen to keep the human race going for centuries without men.  There will be no empty wombs unless women decide against being impregnated.

I know that’s disturbing to men, but it’s a fact of life. Maybe it’s time to put the shoe on the other foot after centuries of male domination—and look where it’s led us!

LL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 12:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Lois - 29 November 2012 10:04 AM
sine dues - 15 November 2012 08:33 AM

You are wrong ! It is equality or it is nothing. Are you so foolish that you think that GIVING women more rights makes it all better. You cannot GIVE rights. You must be willing to give up your life in order to enforce your rights. The takers will take…always….and always from the weak.
No one should accept that women are more valuable than men….silly ! You can’t have one with out the other….“they are the wombs of life” Yup! and with out men it is an empty womb indeed.

Of course you can. Enough sperm can be frozen to keep the human race going for centuries without men.  There will be no empty wombs unless women decide against being impregnated.

I know that’s disturbing to men, but it’s a fact of life. Maybe it’s time to put the shoe on the other foot after centuries of male domination—and look where it’s led us!

LL

If only more knew our ancient history.
Women and Goddesses led mankind for 20 odd thousand years before man developed the weapons powerful enough to kill each other with and that is when men took over and had to start fortifying cities against each other.
We have been warring ever since religions/men told women——-he will rule over you. That is scripture.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 07:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5484
Joined  2010-06-16

And I believe there were some animal experiments that allowed other cells to be converted to sperm cells so males weren’t necessary.  Note, that if this were done with humans all the progeny would have XX chromosomes so they’d be female.  It wouldn’t take long before males would merely be a footnote in history books.

Although as in the Startrek story, there would probably be occasional mutations such that a child would be born male.  Immediate surgery would probably be required.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 11:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
Occam. - 29 November 2012 07:20 PM

And I believe there were some animal experiments that allowed other cells to be converted to sperm cells so males weren’t necessary.  Note, that if this were done with humans all the progeny would have XX chromosomes so they’d be female.  It wouldn’t take long before males would merely be a footnote in history books.

Although as in the Startrek story, there would probably be occasional mutations such that a child would be born male.  Immediate surgery would probably be required.

Occam

Hey, Occam, if we can just survive long enough, til scientists perfect rejuvenation treatments, then surely we won’t have to wait too long for time travel to be invented as well…  Then we can travel to the future where there are only women…  Though we would need to be ready to make a fast getaway, if things went badly.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 November 2012 10:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  604
Joined  2011-08-10
Occam. - 29 November 2012 07:20 PM

And I believe there were some animal experiments that allowed other cells to be converted to sperm cells so males weren’t necessary.  Note, that if this were done with humans all the progeny would have XX chromosomes so they’d be female.  It wouldn’t take long before males would merely be a footnote in history books.

Although as in the Startrek story, there would probably be occasional mutations such that a child would be born male.  Immediate surgery would probably be required.

Occam

That or the patient would not know if, uh, it is coming or going.

I see problems though with being androgynous. One half would ask the other if tonight was the night and the other half would say no and the poor creature might start a fight with itself.

Regards
DL

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1