Don't Evangelicals say that a woman's place is at home

[question everything]

rather then, say, run a state?

Just asking.

[Errrica]

1. I don't think

they'd go for 17 year-old girl pregnant out of wedlock either.
Just sayin'.

[donco6]

2. That's a complicated situation

And it depends on what you mean by "evangelical".

Most people lump fundamentalist Christians all in some camp called "evangelical", but that's not at all accurate. Sarah Palin, for example, is an Assembly of God member. Think Tammy Faye Bakker. Televangelists. That sort of thing. Not evangelical - rather, they are Charismatics. They believe in speaking in tongues, being "slain in the spirit", not only biblical inerrancy, but on-the-spot biblical interpretation relating to you and your situation at that very moment.

Fundamentalists - yeah, they wouldn't be supportive of a woman in charge of men in any arena, church, home or the government. Charismatics on the other hand, don't seem to have much problem with it. There have been many Assemblies run by powerful women.

Evanglicals themselves are a rather mixed breed on this issue. Some churches do not allow women to hold any leadership roles. Some teach that women should not work outside the home at all. Others don't really give a fig.

We all need to keep in mind that there is nothing more divided and divisive than religion - especially Christianity. At the drop of a hat, they can be at each others' throats over the stupidest things. For instance, asking Palin if she believed that God's spiritual gifts were still evident in the church today would elicit an answer that would be certain to split her Christian followers right down the middle.

[question everything]

5. Thanks. We were told, supposedly that one reason why she is on the ticket

is to attract evangelicals who do not "trust" McCain's faith (whatever it is).

Thus, I wondered whether they accept a woman's outside the home and, of course, an out of wedlock pregnancy.

[donco6]

6. Everyone keeps tossing that around.

Like all evanglicals are this massive, unified block. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are a very loosely organized group. They aren't even a denomination fer chrissakes. They have no official leader, just assumed ones, such as Dobson or Chuck Swindoll or Ted Haggard or maybe that Saddleback guy - it's kind of whoever's leading the most "on fire" church at the moment.

Most of the time they can't stand each other! There's always some issue they vehemently disagree on. SOMEtimes they can stay together long enough to vote, IF they believe the cause is important enough. That's why Catholics and Protestants can stay together on abortion. Evangelicals, Charismatics and Fundamentalists are the exact same way. Heck, most of them do not believe any other church teaches true Christianity but theirs!

Charismatics believe you MUST evidence your faith by speaking in tongues. If you don't, you're not really a christian.

Fundamentalists believe Charismatics are whacko. They believe that you must believe in Christ's redemption - and that alone - to be saved. They believe any other teaching is heresy and non-Christian.

Evangelicals are all over the map. Some have Charismatic elements; others refuse them. Some are rabidly anti-gay; others welcome them (to a point).

But all doubt McCain's faith due to numerous issues he's supported or not supported in the Senate. Not to mention his divorce, which in many churches renders you permanently unfit for service. But I can't see many Fundamentalists going for Palin. Not once they know she's Charismatic. And a good portion of the Evangelicals will be turned of by that, too. So, she could bring some votes, but it won't be a massive block like they think.

[undergroundpanther]

3. Nazi's also believed a womans place was at home

raising kids and a servant to her husband.. if you read the social hygiene shit the nazis wrote about roles gender and 'proper behavior' it is so very similar to evangelical fundies it's scary.

[arthritisR_US]

4. only if they don't hunt puppies ;-) n/t

[kestrel91316]

7. Phyllis Schlafly certainly never let that stop her. Oh, and her son

turned out to be gay.

God's rules in the bible they like to pound are merely a means to control the little people. These women are too IMPORTANT to heed such nonsense.

[HawkerHurricane]

8. Worse:

They don't think such rules apply to THEM. They are above such things, don't you know.

[question everything]

9. That's pretty much it. Hypocrisy

You know how they would have reacted had, in the 1996 elections, it was found that Chelsea was pregnant.

[HawkerHurricane]

13. They would have been foaming at the mouth.

But "IOKIYAR".

(Female leaders of the anti-feminist movement are worse than hypocrits, they are fools. If they got what they claim they want, they'd be silenced.)

[stanwyck]

10. Have we heard yet from The Promisekeepers

on the Palin selection? Somehow, I don't think she's a good fit with The Promisekeeper philosophy.
And didn't the Baptists recently adopt the "wives must submit to their husbands" OT instruction into their official doctrine?
Well, as long as Sarah gets Hubby's orders before she decides to invade Iran, all is well.
Remember, if McCain is elected, the former mayor of an Alaskan hamlet is one old man heartbeat away from our highest office.

[tburnsten]

11. Does that make it ok to repeat?

I'm just curious, it seems like saying that because she is a religious person and some religious people have said that a woman's place is in the home doesn't make it so, and it doesn't make it right. This might be a poorly thought out line of attack.

[Stellabella]

12. I've always wanted to see a man tell Phyllis Schafly to

shut up and sit down because she's a woman.