brown@rochester.UUCP (Chris Brown) (10/26/83)
You've come a long way, bubele, But a girl rabbi? Oy veh!
guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris) (10/26/83)
And just what is wrong with a woman rabbi (or woman minister, or woman priest,
or...)?
Guy Harris
{seismo,mcnc,brl-bmd,allegra}!rlgvax!guylaura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (10/29/83)
The problem with saying things like "there ought to be women priests, rabbis, ministers and so on" is that you are now presuming that the only reason that Churches who do not allow such things do not allow such things because they are being "discriminatory" where "discriminatory" is a bad thing. Now, equally clearly, people discriminate al the time and this is a good and necessary thing -- it is only certain forms of discrimination which are bad. If you feel that not having female religious leaders is a bad thing then you generally mean "because women are as good as men, so why not?". However, you are now expecting the religions to be subject to your veiw of reality where there is no relationship between sex and "leadership ability". This is, in my opinion, a bad thing. It is a first step towards making certain criteria mandatory for all religions which is opposed to freedom of religious expression. Again, in my opinion, it is better to either: a) leave the church or b) try to reform it while remaining in the Church or c) start up one's own Church rather than expecting Churches to bend to societal pressure. it is not so much a question of "what is wrong with women priests" but, given that one's religion (or lack of religion) is one's free choice, should people have to justify their beliefs to secular authorities? Laura Creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura