Posted on 09/15/2008 6:28:42 PM PDT by ken21
Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman.
Like a black hole is lacking in light.
Hey Wendy, the 1980’s called, they want their glasses back.
Start with one of two worldviews, and treat people accordingly:
One, humans (including miZZZZ Doniger) are the crowning Glory of God’s creation, created in His image, with eternal existance, for His glory,
or two, humans are evolved apes, alive for 70 some years, with no existance or meaning before or after that time.
Which worldview leads to “50 million dead swept under the rug”?
If I had my choice it sure wouldn’t be a slob like Wendy. Is Wendy a he or a she.
Yes.
My God dear man, a bit of a warning before you do that!!!
My dog just died of a heart attack!!!
Notice that the uglier the woman, the uglier the attack on Sarah Palin? You can make a mathematical formula about this phenomenon. The corollary is the gayer the man the more hysterical attack on Palin. Palin gives Frank Rich the vapors.
September 15th, 2008 8:05 PM Eastern
OK…this title is too funny….check out what the religion professor has written…
by Greta Van Susteren
I am rushing to get ready for ON THE RECORD at 10pm eastern, but I found something funny…check out the name of the speech by the religion professor Wendy Doniger that I blogged about in the blog entry right before this one:
Thinking More Critically About Thinking Too Critically
Convocation Speech, University of Chicago, June 2008
Wendy Doniger
Thinking More Critically About Thinking Too Critically??? Huh? (I wish I had time to read the speech and I probably should since it may give me an entirely different opinion from simply reading the title……maybe I will tomorrow…but in the meantime I have to go get ready for ON THE RECORD at 10pm.)
Text of the speech can be found here if anyone wants to wade through the muck...
http://divinity.uchicago.edu/news/doniger_convocation.pdf
You know you're in bad shape when even Greta makes fun of you....
lol!
The “Sweathog’s” email address:
(I like the term! Definitely stole it from a Freeper above.)
Dr. Doniger,
The question of when life begins is not just a religious one, but also clearly a moral one. One’s religious views might influence that moral opinion, but there is no exclusion on either side of the argument. This is a very basic legal understanding, and I’d expect a bit more academic muster from a UC professor.
That you would take such an incredibly hardline, fundamentalist view and put on blinders a mile thick on the subject is just typical of radical feminists. As the stormtroopers fight to protect the female body, they care not for the female’s body who is ripped in half and discarded into a waste bag—much less the male’s.
I’d further like you to explain to me where the Constitution provides the right to abortion—(I know you’re citing the First Amendment regarding abortion and religion, but I’m calling that argument completely specious given the obvious moral question at hand—something our laws, our Constitution, and our history of common law all take into account). I can, however, clearly cite the US Declaration of Independence that speaks of a God-given right to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness. Or is this just discarded because it’s “imposing a religious belief” on others. *massive roll of eyes*
Perhaps along the with the Second Amendment, per your fierce objection to guns?
Not only is it eggregiously offensive to claim that the origins of life should not be questioned (as you praise Obama’s fence-sitting), it is an absolute failure of the defense of human rights and human dignity. If one believes something is murder, one should, without question, lash out at those who would destroy it.
Or would you take the view that genocide is perfectly okay if one considers another race sub-human or inferior? The question of what is human life should not only be vigorously debated, it is a moral imperative if one at all believes in the dignity of human life.
I have little patience for santimonious windbags who on one hand argue that the origins of life should not be legislated but dare to presume who is indeed a woman. It amuses me to no end how the feminists try to cross that divide.
In the end, morality must be debated any government that is going to remain solvent. And while you might drag out all your Constitutional talk you like, nothing changes the fact that not a week after finalizing the wording of the First Amendment, Congress passed a bill granting funding to and appointing a Congressional Chaplain.
You stand on incredibly flimsy ground.
Regards,
I’ll further note that your belief that all one’s faith is a matter of privacy runs clearly contrary to the final teachings of Christ in the Great Commission. I’m willing to bet you have a pretty hostile attitude towards members of the world’s largest faith, and it’s clearly evident that you let this impede rational and fair discourse. So be it. It’s not like you’re fooling anyone.
that’s phunny!
sweathog.
that she is.
thanks.
IMO, she doesn’t deserve the honor of those robes.
I dunno - sometimes it’s easier being a man. I mean, should some simpering, robe-bedecked academic moron state in public that in his estimation I’m not a man I’d not only be perfectly justified in bloodying his nose but might get a round of applause from the jury if it even reached court. Such an individual would be welcome to suggest to Todd Palin’s face that he isn’t a man. I’d buy a ticket.
This woman is of the cloth...?
A mu mu I presume.
Gee, there's that little word again: F.E.A.R.
As for this Divinity School Professor, here is an entry on the same site, concerning her:
As someone who spent seven years in graduate study of New Testament and Early Christian Literature at the U of C, I feel duty bound to report to SF readers that this is not yet another case of a liberal Christian theologian uttering folly. Prof. Doniger is indeed a radical feminist, but she make no pretense of being a Christian. Her academic specialization is Hinduism ("construction of gender in South Asian religion” or some such), but I never once heard her utter a kind word about the Gospel of Jesus Christ in my time there. To my knowledge, even ultra-liberal Christians would not pass muster with her. The Div School at U of C, despite the fact that it does have a tiny program that trains liberal Protestant ministers, is in practice a secular “religion studies” institution. (Though several faculty in its Church history and theology departments are in fact solid Christians. It is possible, if you are careful, to be properly educated there as a Christian thinker, but steer clear of Ms. Doniger if you feel called to try it!).
[4] Posted by texanglican on 09-11-2008 at 07:06 AM •
What a maroon!
You are only a woman if you kill your baby.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.