₦airaland Forum

Nia,

Alright, let's keep this simple.

You said:

Society MUST push people to be successful and to value leadership. We all benefit from it when we have many competent people competing for leadership.

I am saying:

Society MUST push people to be successful mothers and wives and to value a mother/wifes life. We all benefit from it when we have many ---- people to even lead.

Can we agree that mothers & housewives, people whom bring us children are just as valuable to a society as leaders of the same society?

Good. Now that we are done with that.

The list says: Powerful women.

You want it to say: Powerful women outside of the home, who have their own achievements.

Even though everybody else seems to agree that Mrs. Bush is powerful and deserves to be on the list -- even though her power is in the home.

The list and people recognized women in their respective fields (wives & mothers) and (politics, etc) as being powerful.

You have it in mind that the women listed in the wives & mothers category were not really as worthy of being on the list, as the other women.

Something seems wrong with that idea, even as you claim to think to each their own and do what they want.

I guess one of those things we want is to appreciate women's power in their wives & mothers category and the other category as well.

Both benefit society.

Drusilla, the key word is here is CHOICE. You can live however you want. If you want to live like the top 20 percent of society, you can do that. If you prefer to live like the 80 percent, that is YOUR choice. And it is one you should make based on what makes you comfortable. That is the beauty of living in a free society. No where did I say people should be forced. Again, I specifically stated in my earlier post, "That is, assuming that's what they want."

Do what feels good to you. Gotcha.

unless you're saying Colonialism was a good thing, I'm confused why you would use this analogy. Oppressing a people and dominating them, and consequentially reducing their rights as human beings is not something a civilized society should emulate.

Could you name for me, some of the civilized society's and then name for me the society's that did colonize, oppress and dominate and reduce rights?

Like I said earlier, there will always be people who support the traditional family. And they deserve to be respected for their choices. But this same respect must be extended to those who choose alternative lifestyles. However people choose to live their lives it does not make them less human or their life less important that we should not respect them until they are forced to conform to certain dogmas.

Respect the rights of all. Gotcha.

Yes, we are a society, but first we are individuals. Individuals who must live a life we feel is best for us. If that means not having children, then that's it. If people don't want to have children, why should they be forced? Some people might think very deeply about their lives and conclude that they lack the ability to properly take care of another human being. Why should we be forcing people who don't want children to have them? Are we to assume that they will suddenely love having children after they give birth to them? Is that not irresponsible and likely to do more damage to society if these people turn out to be terrible parents and raise children that are not adequately cared for? maybe (mentally or physically abused?, et cetera, )

We should allow society to committ suicide, as we do the individual. Gotcha.

Rev 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Who is destroying the Earth?

Who is Jesus coming back to destroy?

Are the Indians living in the mountains of peru with their 'heathen' religions destroying the earth?

Are the Twa living in the forests of Africa with their heathen religions destroying the earth?

This reads like your personal sentiments, but I must disagree. Not everybody see things this way. Part of what makes the world go round and what allows civilization to continue to improve, the reason why each younger generation have the opportunity to be smarter than the previous ones, one of the reasons we have advanced the way we have as a people is what you're calling pieces of paper or an old job. Society MUST push people to be successful and to value leadership. We all benefit from it when we have many competent people competing for leadership. So, being the CEO of some company or loading your resume with highly respectable positions is not worthless. It puts you in competition with the best people. When we have many people with good leadership skills in our society, society benefits from it. So, no, it's not just worthless pieces of paper or an old job. It's part of life. Good leaders change people's lives and usually prove to be positive forces in the society. Being a good leader is about caring about those you're leading and looking out for their wellbeing.

Moreover, it is harder to maintain a family when you don't have a job with a steady income and if the job you need requires you to be a leader or to have strong leadership skills (and most top paying jobs DO look for these), it would prove difficult to attain such a job.

I watched a french documentary. The guy asked a very serious question that living in the richest country in the world, I have to ask myself.

If 80 percent of the people do not experience life like me, am I really experiencing the world as the majority of humanity does?

I'm not sure that advocating the policy's that benefit the top 20 percent of the world, is all I want to do with my life.

Maybe I am doing the limousine liberal thing. I'll have to think about that one.

You seem to be forcing some view on me, a view that I never championed. And I'm starting to think you didn't read my replies at all.

I read them. I apologize. Bad habit.

You cannot force people to adopt a way of life that you think is right for them. Ultimately, people have to make decisions for themselves because they're the ones that must live their lives.

Actually you can force them directly and indirectly to adopt any lifestyle you want them to adopt, if your powerful enough. Exhibit A: Africa under Colonialization/Neo-Colonialisation.

And even if you are not that powerful, you can spend years teaching them differently and suddenly, you have people with lots of girls who want to do things that no girl desired before the current education began.

If a man or women decides never to get married, WHY IS THIS A CRIME?

It's not a crime but it does have the effect of killing society as more and more don't feel the pressure to provide the children for the society's future.

Again, unless you can provide concrete research to prove all of these, I can't agree with them.

Yes, the family dynamics have changed over the course of the years, but there are several factors that have affected the changes.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6040427/site/newsweek
http://www.brookings.edu/comm/policybriefs/pb05.htm
http://news.spirithit.com/index/society/more/japans_population_crisis_from_baby_shortage

Gwaine,

Good words.

As the bible says: Better a slap from a friend than a kiss from an enemy.

lordimpaq,

We should not get mixed up.

The devil is said to be a Cherub, Cherubs in fact have human hands and bird wings.

I doubt very much we humans would think of this as beautiful or something to lust after.

The devil's beauty is mainly a metaphor.

It is about the falsehood of the world.

The world is temporary, so is beauty.

Think of the LovePeddler of babylon, all full of gold and precious stones on the outside drinking a cup full of abominations.

It is also the way in which the bible means: satan is beautiful.

Gwaine,

Thank you.  

Another rather revealing biblical metaphor about satan:

Job 41:34  He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

What do these children of pride look like?  

Psa 73:3-8  For I was envious at the foolish, when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For there are no bands in their death: but their strength is firm.  They are not in trouble as other men; neither are they plagued like other men. Therefore pride compasseth them about as a chain; violence covereth them as a garment.  Their eyes stand out with fatness: they have more than heart could wish.  They are corrupt, and speak wickedly concerning oppression: they speak loftily.

When is the last time IF EVER you heard a sermon on the fact that the wicked in this world prosper?

Psa 73:12  Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world; they increase in riches.

All the churches are preaching 'get your money-- the benjamins baby' the exact same way that society promotes it, hollywoord promotes it, the politicians promote it and music songs especially rap songs promote it.

Or as I like to tell people.

Jesus turned down the kingdoms of the world that satan offered Him.

The church accepted satan's offer.

I am not sure how you got that from my post. Even though I am not an ardent supporter of traditionalism I do not "diminsh" anyone's choice to live the life they see best. If a woman wants to be a good housewife, or a stay at home mother, good for her.  If a woman wants to take on leadership roles and garner the force to execute considerable influence among a certain group of people, (i.e. be in leadership), good for her. (although the first and second are not mutually exclusive),

Nia,

I think a family is a certain group of people and I think the wife and mother of each family has a considerable influence among them. 

There's no written law that says setting your goal on leading a/your people is something "only a man sees as accomplishment". Leadership is universally acknowledged as a great accomplishment by both members of the sexes. (I specifically remember how being president of "so and so" club and vice president of this and that always bulks up your resume when applying for certain positions not to mention college and universities. So, i can't agree with you that leadership is something only men see as accomplishments. Again, many people like to be leaders, not followers, sex notwithstanding.

And in the end, those pieces of paper and jobs and admiring employee's fade away and we cry over mama or our wife or our children more than any of them. Nobody ever dies thinking about a piece of paper or an old job. We all die wishing we would have taken more time to love and care for those we say we love.

TO ADDRESS YOUR ASSUMPTION: I included in my post "THAT IS, IF THAT'S REALLY WHAT THEY WANT", specifically to avoid the type of assertion you're making. No one is saying people should be forced to believe that they want to become a powerful leader because it is more commendable than being a homemaker or a first Lady. What I wrote is that those who DO want to be in leadership should not be encouraged to settle for second best.

Being first lady is not second best. Second best is being the second lady or vice presidents wife.

THE ISSUE OF SECOND BEST:
I slightly touched on this earlier but I'll attempt to be clearer. If what you want is to lead a people and to have strong influential force among those people then clearly being a first lady is second best, in that context. You simply cannot have the same impact as having direct power (more or less). This is not saying that being a first lady is useless, Period. (Which seems to be what you're insinuating).  If that's your goal in life, then it CANNOT be second best FOR YOU.  But in the contexts of being an influential force and assuming that's what you want, it greatly pales in comparison to being directly in leadership/power.

I think the poll shows that people have correctly surmised that Mrs. Bush is powerful simply by having the ear of the most powerful person in the world.

We can't have it both ways. We can not say leadership outside the home is far greater than leadership in the home. Then wonder why people do not want to get married nor stay married. Why are families falling apart etc.

As it is now in America, 62 percent of marriages end in divorce and second marriages end in divorce more often and quicker.

We got to stop sending these scitzophrenic messages to women and men and family's.

Then sitting back crying about why they do not want to get married, stay at home and raise good children and be strong in their own position in this world.

Men of course read the message equally as clear. If outside the home matters more than in the home, they why not get a young trophy wife, the people outside the home will see the beauty in that more than your old tired wife.

Children grow up now and don't want to marry or have children even if they do get married well into their 40's and the parents if they become a problem are shipped immeadiately away to the nursing home.

They have heard the message as well, that it is all about them and what they want in this life, that is the only way to be valued.

I know this is the message that is fed to people in the west. So now the west sits around wringing it's hands that family's are fading, marriage is fading, children are fading.

Back in the 1960's people used to wring their hands about Black people's outrageous baby out of wedlock numbers. It was 25 percent.

Now white people's baby out of wedlocks numbers are 25 percent.

We need to think about the scitzophrenic messages we are sending people. It's a society killer to not value what women do in the capacity that most of them consider pretty important.

Nia,

I think it is okay, if little girls grow up dreaming about being First Lady. I do not think at all it is a shabby second best as your post would imply.

I find that being a good wife, a good mother is still respectable for a woman in my eyes.

I do not think we should constantly diminish what women do and place value on women only if they can imitate what men consider to be accomplishments.

Lordimpaq,

Every person I know who has dreamed about the devil, says that he looked very handsome. And was of course dressed in the most elegant clothes.

Look at Jesus, the bible says that he was not much to look at.

I think it is a perfect analogy of what this world is all about.

Those considered the prettiest, richest, best dressed are esteemed highly in this world.

Those who may have the best heart and be the true King, are rejected and scorned and hated and killed.

As the bible also says: I have seen slaves sitting on horses and princes walking along.

That is basically what this world is, the slaves (to the devil)are ruling the world, while the servants of God, barely have anything.

Don't let the church of the laodicians fool ya.

Nia,

Again, you are wrong. The US was colonised by Britain (refer to American History) and China was colonised by the Empire of Japan (refer to Chinese "Education in National Humiliation”).

I saw that error last night.

Even saying that the Chinese was colonized by the Japanese does not go far enough.

In fact the British did in China what they first did in Africa.

They signed treaties with the defeated Chinese that made it look as if China was still independent but in fact China was bowing to the British in their own land.

The opium wars were about the Chinese attempt to get their people off of drugs and the British forcing them to stop trying to get rid of addicts who purchased British Drugs.

Basically forcing Chinese people to be drug addicts so that the Brittish could get rich.

Britain gave China a serious beating and nobody should doubt it.

Chinese officials had no right to sell their goods or buy any goods unless the British first signed off on it.

The Chinese may have retained a 'yellow' faced ruler but have no doubt about it, they were also 'colonized' and existed in this British dominated state for a very very long time.

I generally care what my family thinks of me.

I come from a family of preachers and we have high expectations of each other. We are constantly in a state of shock because so and so did what?!

In my youth, I resented my family dominating my every thought and action (along with God, who they claimed to be working in His name).

Yet as I have gotten older, I have begun to understand how this in fact saved my family from deteriorating into some of the kind of family's that I see about me that are not pretty.

We are talking about you but apparently it is because we love you and want you to do better.