Most of you know I tend to focus on the context than the content details of a story of a position. Meaning I can give a rats ass about CEO Rios opinion on whether or not a woman should be President. It's quite irrelevant to me. Americans IMO get way to wrapped up in a single persons content as opposed to the bigger context at play here.
What I'm about to address isn't something new but I'm interested in hearing from passioned people who have similar ways of thinking. How do highly intelligent people SELECTIVELY utilize a text that to them means everything to them in terms of making certain decisions but expose themselves terribly in reality.
I have respect for liberals to conservatives and even extremists if you can demonstrate a clear path to the conclusion. I may not agree with your stance but at least I know where you are coming from. So, this CEO who has a proclaimed deep Christian faith says a woman shouldn't be President because of hormones and a strong Christian background. However women can be doctors lawyers whatever, basically any position other than Commander in Chief.
Remember, I'm strictly talking about the ability to support an argument.
1. Hormones - OK, I can see what she is generally getting at. There is basic data that we act differently due to hormones so there is merit to that. However, wouldn't you be concerned about a woman going through a massive mood swing at the time of your ER trauma? What about women in control of billions of dollars and jobs? But ok, we'll let it pass so far.
2. Strong Christian background - why continue to bastardized a religious background and biblical text when you've already stated a woman can basically ANYTHING other than be President. She wants women to Aspire to be anything you want but make sure you are serving your man dinner at home. Quit abusing Christianity and the Bible, you can't have it both ways.
Why do deep rooted Christians cheapen their Christian faith by selectively picking things that support their view but at the same time completely discredit their faith. I firmly believe most that use their faith do it as a failsafe thinking they are giving people no where else to go. When in reality all they do is distance themselves from making a legitimate argument and people write them off because they try to use religion as a safeguard and fail miserably 95% of the time. It's a heck of a lot easier to say, " I think Hillary sucks because of decades worth of poor decisions". Instead you abuse your faith like many do.
CEO woman says Man only for President.
What I'm about to address isn't something new but I'm interested in hearing from passioned people who have similar ways of thinking. How do highly intelligent people SELECTIVELY utilize a text that to them means everything to them in terms of making certain decisions but expose themselves terribly in reality.
I have respect for liberals to conservatives and even extremists if you can demonstrate a clear path to the conclusion. I may not agree with your stance but at least I know where you are coming from. So, this CEO who has a proclaimed deep Christian faith says a woman shouldn't be President because of hormones and a strong Christian background. However women can be doctors lawyers whatever, basically any position other than Commander in Chief.
Remember, I'm strictly talking about the ability to support an argument.
1. Hormones - OK, I can see what she is generally getting at. There is basic data that we act differently due to hormones so there is merit to that. However, wouldn't you be concerned about a woman going through a massive mood swing at the time of your ER trauma? What about women in control of billions of dollars and jobs? But ok, we'll let it pass so far.
2. Strong Christian background - why continue to bastardized a religious background and biblical text when you've already stated a woman can basically ANYTHING other than be President. She wants women to Aspire to be anything you want but make sure you are serving your man dinner at home. Quit abusing Christianity and the Bible, you can't have it both ways.
Why do deep rooted Christians cheapen their Christian faith by selectively picking things that support their view but at the same time completely discredit their faith. I firmly believe most that use their faith do it as a failsafe thinking they are giving people no where else to go. When in reality all they do is distance themselves from making a legitimate argument and people write them off because they try to use religion as a safeguard and fail miserably 95% of the time. It's a heck of a lot easier to say, " I think Hillary sucks because of decades worth of poor decisions". Instead you abuse your faith like many do.
CEO woman says Man only for President.
