[QUOTE=MistressNomad;1059728475]Of course they don't. But according to some interpretations of the Bible, they do. Whether or not this is reflected in reality makes no difference to whether or not people believe it.
Is that not, in fact, exactly what she said she did? Did she not, in fact, say that she chose her specific career, which she didn't want, because her husband told her to? Is that not, in fact, the only reason she gave?
It doesn't matter what your entirely subjective, and in this case, apologetic interpretation of the Bible is. She said what she said. She did not want to be a tax lawyer, in fact she hated the idea. But she did it because her husband told her to. That is what she said. I don't need to "understand" anything about your apologetics to understand what she said.
Thats right Mistress and her saying she did not want to be a tax lawyer and becoming one because she submitted to her husband made the question absolutely appropriate....it was not a hypothetical question it was clarifying what she herself had already claimed to be true.
"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything." (Ephesians 5:22-24)
"Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. (I Timothy 2:11-14)
"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)
One could make a perfectly cogent case that Christian women are obligated to be subservient to their husbands in every sphere of life. As I said; there don't appear to be any exceptions specified. The question is not; 'How do modern Christian apologists typically interpret these passages?', it's; 'How does Michelle Bachmann interpret these passages?'
Economic Left/Right: -7.25, Authoritarian/Libertarian:-7.13
All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume. -Noam Chomsky
And her original statement included nothing about a mutual submissiveness - it was only about women submitting. And the Bible is fairly consistent in that message.
Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 08-14-11 at 10:33 PM.
In a world of special-interest lobbyists, campaign donors and back-room deals, we at least have the benefit of knowing up front the people who influence her most.
Last edited by Jerry; 08-14-11 at 10:49 PM.
You are right in a legal sense. That does not mean Bachmann will respect that. And we have no way to make sure she does.
Bush said "god told him" to invade Iraq, after all. While you are absolutely right, we as a country do not hold people accountable for ruling by their religion. In fact, one of our parties endorses it and some people in this country won't vote for anyone who isn't extremely, fanatically Christian.