I woke up early this morning and I put the radio on for a few minutes while my brain slowly defragged itself. It was a sunday morning religious programme and they were discussing a recent case in New York where a woman had had the temerity to lead a mixed congregation in prayer. The interviewer asked a british muslim leader about his views and for a while he was keen to stress that modern islam is enlightened and that women have many important roles to play, but when pressed a little further he said that an imam has a duty to lead prayer five times a day, every day, and that a woman couldn't do that when she was having her period.
Enlightened my arse.
The catholics are the same. They are quite happy for paedophiles to work as priests, as long as no one finds out, but a woman doing that job would be an abomination. The good old liberal c of e will let a woman work as a vicar, but they draw the line at a woman or a gay man being a bishop, presumably because they wouldn't be able to bring the necessary dignity to the job when wearing a purple frock.
Don't get me started on the ignorant bigots at christian voice who are trying to turn the looming election campaign into a debate on abortion and have even got the catholic and anglican archbishops to start pontificating on the issue.
Gits.
Enlightened my arse.
The catholics are the same. They are quite happy for paedophiles to work as priests, as long as no one finds out, but a woman doing that job would be an abomination. The good old liberal c of e will let a woman work as a vicar, but they draw the line at a woman or a gay man being a bishop, presumably because they wouldn't be able to bring the necessary dignity to the job when wearing a purple frock.
Don't get me started on the ignorant bigots at christian voice who are trying to turn the looming election campaign into a debate on abortion and have even got the catholic and anglican archbishops to start pontificating on the issue.
Gits.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-20 09:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-20 12:15 pm (UTC)I think the establishment of church and state, leaders of which tend to be male still, hated to lose power over the birth process. They can't actually have babies but were able to control women's bodies to say who carried the babies and whether they had to continue.
I think it should be up to each individual woman. No law should decree whether she carries the baby or not. I don't think women decide lightly to have abortions. They do it for various reasons, and it should be up to them. Nobody should decide what happens to their bodies. Until the child is born I do not think it should have the right to make the mother carry it.
Actually the ones who do decide for convenience, because they don't want a child just now, or have some already and are older, usually do not have a problem getting 2 doctors to sign in good time to allow it. So the law does not limit abortion to those who have a serious reason for wanting it.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-20 07:26 pm (UTC)