But men didn't wear anything in that second photo when Deuteronomy was in play. And isn't that a bit ceremonial and symbolic? And aren't we free of that? I think a lot of things had value and even specific purpose in that covenant that are valueless (or even counterproductive to the point) today.
lain:
I think it bears repeating.
Rather, there's a systemic problem with generational poverty that needs to be addressed. It's simply and for a host of reasons more deeply rooted in the black community. It's absolutely a hard problem to work, but it's doable on the criminal justice side in terms of reviewing the application of standards and counteracting it by judicial censure where appropriate.
It's really just a different form of bias in action. Bias against blacks/assumptions about rooted in racism. With women it's societal expectations and bias relating to their treatment. It's the same impulse that will stay the hand of a man hearing fighting words from a woman where he'd punch the fellow who said it. I think it's harder to treat this one, because it's about leniency.
Separate issue. Like racism, I know it when I hear it.
Taking circumstance into account isn't really a bias, it's reasonable mitigation.
No, I'm certain there weren't male slacks, button down shirts and ties then. The Romans invented the precursor to the tie, but the Hebrews weren't using it. The whole outfit in question wasn't what was meant by male clothing when Duet. was penned. So what was the author really aiming at? Distinguishing between men and women and keeping the roles clear. Supporting the clear social order that was necessary for the Jewish people. The OT is full of distinctions like that to keep the Jews separate as God's people, don't you think?
I don' t know. I'd bet there were.
I don't believe so, but you missed an opportunity to answer a few questions and engage in genial points of difference and distinction that might help someone. Maybe even one or both of us.
I didn't do any of that. Why you think I did will remain a mystery, given your decision. In any event, I'm sorry you feel difference of a opinion offered in amiable terms is grounds for outrage, questioning my character (again) and plugged ears.
You can sell your woman issues elsewhere. I've done what I can for you on that front and I understand it's as pointless discussing it with you as discussing race with a Klansman. What undermined the black community was and remains systemically disproportionate poverty. Women didn't start kicking fathers to the curb. Men and women in this country have become increasingly less interested in traditional social conventions relating to sexuality. Some of that has come at cost to the stability of the social order.
I'd say anyone looking at the data, regarding race or gender, should be able to see that women get breaks that aren't given to men and whites get breaks that aren't largely extended to minorities. The rest is what we do about it.
lain:
The word 'bum' offends me- it is a dehumanizing word that nobody, especially Christians, should use.
I was homeless just five months ago- I've experienced being under the bridge even in my time on this site.
That word is unacceptable to me- I'll put it this way- if you called me that while I was on the street..
When Trump finally crosses enough lines to force Congress to take action, those Republican politicians who have remained silent or conveniently looked the other way will be held accountable - and it won't be a pretty day of reckoning!
President Trump will continue to keep his promises and make America great again - MAGA
:mmph: