Muhammed mentioned in the Bible and Torah.

[Yitzi_K]

Both men and women can initiate divorce proceedings, just through different ways. Like I said before, we consider men and women to be different. That does not mean either are better than the other. Neither one has their rights impeded, they just use a different process.

Again, and again, and again, I tell you that you a factually incorrect in your claim that the consent of the wife is not necessary in a divorce, as per the Cherem of Rabbeinu Gershom. This may interest you: There are actually more Israeli men being refused divorces by their wives than women by their husbands.

Now based on the above link, which absolutely disproves everything you've been claiming about how women can be forced into divorce, I expect an apology for your abusive comments. I've stated many times that you are basing your claims on complete falsities, and you've consistently ignored this and continued to post your incorrect statements time and time again. Consent does NOT mean pressing the get into the hand of the women; if it did, how could men possibly be denied a divorce, as are those mentioned in the link above?

Again, if you actually did real research and didn't just post the same nonsense over and over, you wouldn't end up abusing me using vulgar language (quite possibly breaking a couple of forum rules in the process, Mr Admin), because you'd see that in this case at least, I am right and you are categorically wrong.

To sum up: Both men and women need to give actual genuine consent to their spouse in order for a divorce to take effect. This is unarguable Jewish law, despite your claims to the opposite. And that to me sounds a lot like equality.

[enwiabe]

Both men and women can initiate divorce proceedings, just through different ways. Like I said before, we consider men and women to be different. That does not mean either are better than the other. Neither one has their rights impeded, they just use a different process.

Again, and again, and again, I tell you that you a factually incorrect in your claim that the consent of the wife is not necessary in a divorce, as per the Cherem of Rabbeinu Gershom. This may interest you: There are actually more Israeli men being refused divorces by their wives than women by their husbands.

Now based on the above link, which absolutely disproves everything you've been claiming about how women can be forced into divorce, I expect an apology for your abusive comments. I've stated many times that you are basing your claims on complete falsities, and you've consistently ignored this and continued to post your incorrect statements time and time again. Consent does NOT mean pressing the get into the hand of the women; if it did, how could men possibly be denied a divorce, as are those mentioned in the link above?

Again, if you actually did real research and didn't just post the same nonsense over and over, you wouldn't end up abusing me using vulgar language (quite possibly breaking a couple of forum rules in the process, Mr Admin), because you'd see that in this case at least, I am right and you are categorically wrong.

To sum up: Both men and women need to give actual genuine consent to their spouse in order for a divorce to take effect. This is unarguable Jewish law, despite your claims to the opposite. And that to me sounds a lot like equality.

However, you're still glossing over the fact that it is far easier for the man to get a divorce than the woman. Whereas the man can just ask for the document, a woman has to sue for it. That is not equitable, that is extremely sexist.

I was also calling the religion sexist, not its practitioners (although a great deal many are by their refusal to allow women to teach men). See, it's actually neither here nor there that the Cherem of Gershom makes the whole process more fair. I'll more than happily cede to you that the process is exactly what you say it is now (except for your glossing over of men having it easier than women to do it).

I was moreso arguing what was written down in the torah, which is supposedly the word of god, is that women are not important in divorce proceedings. That is sexist, and that makes the religion itself sexist because very clearly, god is sexist.

It was only when the orthodox realised this was untenable, and they were facing a revolt, that they had to actually edit the word of "god" in order to make it more palatable to the masses. My exercise here was to make you see how sexist your religion truly is. It is extremely flawed

EDIT: It's interesting, when I showed you how the refusal to allow women to be rabbis was the definition of sexism that you shut up on that point. You didn't even try to rebut it...

[Yitzi_K]

G-d is not sexist, G-d allocates different roles in life for men and women. That is His decision and not for us to argue with.

I didn't argue your point, not because I agree with it, but because I had already stated my opinion in the previous post. What you call sexism, I call allocation of different roles to different genders. Men and women are different, and it makes perfect sense that they should play different roles, neither of which is less worthwhile than the other. If men and women were intended to play identical roles, they'd have been created identical.

I'm still yet to hear an apology for your vulgar personal abuse, despite you now admitting that I was right all along.

[enwiabe]

I never admitted you were right all along. I ceded part of your argument you were banging on about relentlessly so you'd see the bigger picture that it's still sexist. And you might be happy not to use your brain, and not to think things through, but gender roles are the definition of sexism, and so you cannot argue that Judaism is not sexist if you already agree that there are religiously defined gender roles. That is sexism by definition! You're admitting it without admitting it. How frustrating.

[MJRomeo81]

I'm still yet to hear an apology for your vulgar personal abuse, despite you now admitting that I was right all along.

You won't get one off this guy mate. Take a look at the previous pages of this thread and you'll see it's in his nature to start with the verbal abuse. Once again, I refer to the forum rules:

ATAR Notes (AN) will always be a safe community environment for all denominations of society. This means no racism, homophobia, or discrimination of any kind. Any comments making mass generalisations on the basis of sex, race, religion, or sexual preference must be supported by citable empirical evidence. AN takes a zero-tolerance policy to such bigotry.

I'll reiterate that the admin was the first person in the topic to start the verbal abuse. If you don't like the thread, as I've said countless times, GTFO. No one is forcing you to read religious discussion.

You dun' goofed. brb waiting for 'i have an obligation to help society'. brb waiting for 'i didn't infringe the rules because I'll manipulate things the way I like.'

enwiabe no one expects you to convert to Judaism/Catholicism. Yitzi probably doesn't mind having a debate. But what's with the name calling brah? You mad?

[ninwa]

If you don't like the thread, as I've said countless times, GTFO.

Take your own advice I see you're still mad about the carbon tax thread, eh?

[MJRomeo81]

I see you're still mad about the carbon tax thread, eh?

LOL why would I be mad about a stupid tax? Religion means a lot to me, unlike a tax that hardly affects me personally. I was merely debating and pointing out some problems. Once I felt my point had been made (whether it was accepted or not), I stated that I wouldn't be posting in the thread any more.

Let's not get off topic here.

[Yitzi_K]

Let's not get off topic here.

ROFLMAO

[ninwa]

Well, it looks like Yitzi doesn't want to make any further reply. So, I'm going to lock this thread now, because it's been off-topic since the first page and religion threads are never going to get anywhere.