-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Who should vote?
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
Foolish bill. Illegals should never be allowed to vote.
As for the OP, "Who should vote", I would say any land owning male, and widows who are heads of house.
As for the OP, "Who should vote", I would say any land owning male, and widows who are heads of house.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
How about land owning women that aren’t widows?
Do you believe single women shouldn’t be allowed to own property?
What exactly is the reason behind not allowing women to vote?
peace to you
God created men differently than women. God has ordered the universe to be a Patriarchy, we even call God Father (not Mother). Men are always going to be on top because God made men to be on top. Men are even competing to be the best women and are winning nowadays - see Bruce Jenner "Woman of the Year", or men in women's sports, etc. Men will always come out on top because God made that men's nature and you can't fight God's Order. All we can do is choose WHICH men get on top, not WHETHER men get on top. And I think responsible land-owning men need to be on top, not Bruce Jenner.
Therefore since God ordered the universe to be a Patriarchy, we would be best served to follow His example. The only time in the Bible I know of when a woman leads was Deborah in Judges I believe. And she was there to be a judgement on Israel. Isaiah 3:12 also makes it plain when Isaiah says that women and children ruling over a nation are a judgement upon it and are negative.
Land owning women that aren't widows - I would vote no as I would want them to get Married.
Single women should be allowed to own property, but they shouldn't get paid the same as a married man.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
I must be honest that I am surprised to see it written down. I just don’t understand how anyone could believe that
I disagree. Israel lived in a monarchy. There was no voting. God’s order for church leadership, imo, does not apply to secular governments or secular jobs.
I cringed when I read that you want single women to get married and that women shouldn’t be paid as much as married men. I want single people, men and women, to live their lives for the cause of Christ and to be paid whatever their work is worth.
well, I appreciate your honesty. Thanks for the conversation.
Peace to you
I can't say, I'd insist on land-owning males, unless........all taxation was upon land ownership itself.
Such a theory works and worked well enough when land ownership was genuinely an affordable reality. Even the poorest classes were land-owning subsistence farmers.
In a wage-based and mercantile/industrial economy, working, wage earning men who pay taxes should vote.
Anyone who pays taxes, should have representation.
It is unrealistic for a hard-working and wage earning and tax-paying urbanite (who pays rent) with a wife and kids who works and contributes to be denied voting rights because some unemployed hippie inherited 1/4 acre in some meth-town somewhere.
The larger point, is "skin in the game". It isn't necessary for someone to actually own real estate to have skin in the game in a modern economy.
Such a theory works and worked well enough when land ownership was genuinely an affordable reality. Even the poorest classes were land-owning subsistence farmers.
In a wage-based and mercantile/industrial economy, working, wage earning men who pay taxes should vote.
Anyone who pays taxes, should have representation.
It is unrealistic for a hard-working and wage earning and tax-paying urbanite (who pays rent) with a wife and kids who works and contributes to be denied voting rights because some unemployed hippie inherited 1/4 acre in some meth-town somewhere.
The larger point, is "skin in the game". It isn't necessary for someone to actually own real estate to have skin in the game in a modern economy.
Good point. Owning land isn't significant, or as signidicant, in todaysignificant,
I'd say taxation should determine voter eligibility.
If I pay taxes yet cannot vote, that is effectually taxation without representation.
Quite the same direction....KY summed it up with "skin in the game".
Good gravy!! I'm so glad that my right to vote, as a single woman, isn't dependent on the opinion of men on the Baptist Board!
May I rephrase: I'm so glad that my right to vote, as a single woman, isn't dependent on the opinion of SOME OF THE men on the Baptist Board!
Good to see you again Scarlet!
When I was in Germany - I visited a church where - according to the church constitution - business meetings consisted ONLY of male members. 1) women could not vote 2) you had to be a member to even attend the business meeting.
I spoke to the pastor about that - and he told me he only recently became pastor and he was in the mist of making a new constitution to change those two items - among others.
I then joined the church.
That's how one of the Reformed Baptist Churches, and several of the Presbyterian Churches in our area do their business meetings. Women attend, but do not vote.
Heads-of-household are the only members allowed to vote - widow women, single men over 18, and married men.
So its not a democracy
Correct, not a Democracy. More like a Republic.
So explain to me how I, as a 61-year-old and never-married American female, should not be allowed to vote?
Voting at our church meetings is limited to members, men and women. Membership mandates commitment to serve as God enables and to be accountable to church members. Those unwilling to so commit should not be those who govern church practices.
OAS -is there an age limit?
Where? At a Church meeting, or in general politics?