… … on the first anniversary of our belovéd Aunt Ruby’s dying on Women’s Equality Day y2013 … …

https://ffrf.org/shop/nontracts/why-women-need-freedom-from-religion  

Why Women Need Freedom From Religion

Organized religion always has been and remains the greatest enemy of women’s rights. In the Christian-dominated Western world, two bible verses in particular sum up the position of women:

“I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” By this third chapter of Genesis, woman lost her rights, her standing—even her identity, and motherhood became a God-inflicted curse degrading her status in the world.

In the New Testament, the bible decrees:

“Let the woman 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. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” 1 Tim. 2:11-14

One bible verse alone, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” is responsible for the death of tens of thousands, if not millions, of women. Do women and those who care about them need further evidence of the great harm of Christianity, predicated as it has been on these and similar teachings about women?

Church writer Tertullian said “each of you women is an Eve . . . You are the gate of Hell, you are the temptress of the forbidden tree; you are the first deserter of the divine law.”

Martin Luther decreed: “If a woman grows weary and at last dies from childbearing, it matters not. Let her die from bearing, she is there to do it.”

Such teachings prompted 19th-century feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton to write: “The Bible and the Church have been the greatest stumbling blocks in the way of woman’s emancipation.”

The various Christian churches fought tooth and nail against the advancement of women, opposing everything from women’s right to speak in public, to the use of anesthesia in childbirth (since the bible says women must suffer in childbirth) and woman’s suffrage. Today the most organized and formidable opponent of women’s social, economic and sexual rights remains organized religion. Religionists defeated the Equal Rights Amendment. Religious fanatics and bullies are currently engaged in an outright war of terrorism and harassment against women who have abortions and the medical staff which serves them. Those seeking to challenge inequities and advance the status of women today are fighting a massive coalition of fundamentalist Protestant and Catholic churches and religious groups mobilized to fight women’s rights, gay rights, and secular government.

Why do women remain second-class citizens? Why is there a religion-fostered war against women’s rights? Because the bible is a handbook for the subjugation of women. The bible establishes woman’s inferior status, her “uncleanliness,” her transgressions, and God-ordained master/servant relationship to man. Biblical women are possessions: fathers own them, sell them into bondage, even sacrifice them. The bible sanctions rape during wartime and in other contexts. Wives are subject to Mosaic-law sanctioned “bedchecks” as brides, and male jealousy fits and no-notice divorce as wives. The most typical biblical labels of women are “harlot” and “whore.” They are described as having evil, even satanic powers of allurement. Contempt for women’s bodies and reproductive capacity is a bedrock of the bible. The few role models offered are stereotyped, conventional and inadequate, with bible heroines admired for obedience and battle spirit. Jesus scorns his own mother, refusing to bless her, and issues dire warnings about the fate of pregnant and nursing women.

There are more than 200 bible verses that specifically belittle and demean women. Here are just a few:

Genesis 2:22 Woman created from Adam’s rib
3:16 Woman cursed: maternity a sin, marriage a bondage
19:1–8 Rape virgins instead of male angels
Exodus 20:17 Insulting Tenth Commandment
21:7–11 Unfair rules for female servants, may be sex slaves
22:18 “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”
38:8 Women may not enter tabernacle they must support
Leviticus 12:1–14 Women who have sons are unclean 7 days
12:4–7 Women who have daughters are unclean 14 days
15:19–23 Menstrual periods are unclean
19:20–22 If master has sex with engaged woman, she shall be scourged
Numbers 1:2 Poll of people only includes men
5:13–31 Barbaric adulteress test
31:16–35 “Virgins” listed as war booty
Deuteronomy 21:11–14 Rape manual
22:5 Abomination for women to wear men’s garments, vice-versa
22:13–21 Barbaric virgin test
22:23–24 Woman raped in city, she & her rapist both stoned to death
22:28–29 Woman must marry her rapist
24:1 Men can divorce woman for “uncleanness,” not vice-versa
25:11–12 If woman touches foe’s penis, her hand shall be cut off
Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah’s nameless daughter sacrificed
19:22–29 Concubine sacrificed to rapist crowd to save man
I Kings 11:1–4 King Solomon had 700 wives & 300 concubines
Job 14:1–4 “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one . . .”
Proverbs 7:9–27 Evil women seduce men, send them to hell
11:22 One of numerous Proverbial putdowns
Isaiah 3:16–17 God scourges, rapes haughty women
Ezekiel 16:45 One of numerous obscene denunciations
Matthew 24:19 “[woe] to them that are with child”
Luke 2:22 Mary is unclean after birth of Jesus
I Corinthians 11:3–15 Man is head of woman; only man in God’s image
14:34–35 Women keep in silence, learn only from husbands
Ephesians 5:22–33 “Wives, submit . . .”
Colossians 3:18 More “wives submit”
I Timothy 2:9 Women adorn selves in shamefacedness
2:11–14 Women learn in silence in all subjection; Eve was sinful, Adam blameless

Why should women—and the men who honor women—respect and support religions which preach women’s submission, which make women’s subjugation a cornerstone of their theology?

When attempts are made to base laws on the bible, women must beware. The constitutional principle of separation between church and state is the only sure barrier standing between women and the bible

"The man (and his mom) who gave women the vote"

“From his statements, he changed his mind because of his mother’s note persuading him to support the amendment.  Many say his vote cost Burn his political career.  It should be noted that after Burn cast his historic vote, he hid in the attic of the capitol until the maddening crowds cleared away.  It is also rumored that the anti-suffragists were so angry at his decision that they chased him from the chamber, forced him to climb out a window of the Capitol and inch along a ledge to safety.  We are fortunate that this uncommon man listened to his mother’s advice and put thought into his decision, as it guaranteed all American women the right to vote.” --- http://www.tennessee.gov/tsla/exhibits/suffrage/beginning.htm

The man (and his mom) who gave women the vote

18 August 2014 by Scott Bomboy

On the 94th anniversary of the 19th Amendment’s ratification, we look back at a young politician whose unexpected vote in the Tennessee state legislature gave all women the right to vote.
The story of Harry T. Burn, the seemingly rogue 24-year-old legislator, has become a bit embellished over the years. And in fact, women had won the right to vote in some states before the 19^th amendment was passed by Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states then in the Union.

But in August 1920, the struggle between the suffrage movement (which wanted the vote for women) and powerful anti-suffrage forces had come down to a series of votes in Tennessee.

The suffrage movement had found a way to get Congress to approve the proposed 19^th amendment, with the endorsement of outgoing President Woodrow Wilson (who hadn’t supported it until it became needed as part of the war effort).

By the middle of 1920, a total of 35 states had voted to ratify the amendment. The problem was that 36 states were needed, and there was really only one state left were a vote could be taken that year.
Four other available states—Connecticut, Vermont, North Carolina and Florida—would not consider the resolution for various reasons. The remaining states had rejected the amendment. But Tennessee decided it would tackle the ratification vote.

Supporters from both sides camped out at a Nashville hotel and began intense lobbying efforts in what became known as the War of the Roses. Supporters of suffrage wore yellow roses in public; the anti-suffragists wore red roses.

The suffragists had lobbied Burn, the youngest member of the state house, but they were unsure of how he would vote.

They did know that any vote to bring the amendment to the floor would be too close to call, as well as the vote to ratify the amendment.

On August 18, the legislature voted on a motion to table, or delay, any ratification vote. It seemed as if the anti-suffragists had enough votes to delay a 19^th amendment vote, after Burn arrived wearing a red rose and voted to table the amendment.

But another representative, Banks Turner, switched sides during the roll call, leaving the vote deadlocked and moving the ratification vote forward. The suffragists would need one more vote to make the 19^th amendment the law of the land, and what happened stunned the legislature.

Early in the voting, Burn, who came from a conservative district and wore the red rose on his lapel, said in a very clear voice “aye” when asked if he would vote to ratify the 19^th amendment.

Burn also had a letter in his suit pocket, from his mother Febb E. Burn, in which she asked him to “be a good boy” and vote for the amendment. When Turner also voted in favor of the ratification, the 70-year-old battle for suffrage was over.

Link: Read The Seven-Page Letter

Lawmakers in Tennessee tried to delay the state’s official approval, but on August 26, 1920, the official documents arrived in Washington and they were quietly signed by the Secretary of State.

Burn later explained that he initially vote to table the vote so it could be brought back in the next legislative session. But after it came to the floor, he had several reasons to change his vote.

“I knew that a mother’s advice is always safest for a boy to follow and my mother wanted me to vote for ratification,” he said. “I appreciated the fact that an opportunity such as seldom comes to a mortal man to free 17 million women from political slavery was mine.”

Febb E. Burn then said she was pressured in person by the governor of Louisiana’s wife to recant the letter and say it was a fraud. She refused to do so.

Scott Bomboy is the editor in chief of the National Constitution Center.

Why --- at all --- Nagasaki ?

blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/08/09/why-nagasaki

Why ?  Why --- at all --- Nagasaki ?  Too ?

Our killings could have, as well --- save for a dude named Hank Stimson, included next after Nagasaki's annihilation then ... ... another pogrom also:  Kyoto !

Then - US Secretary o' Warring ( 'ith Those 'Others' Different Than Us Folk ) Stimson had 'personal' reasons for sparing the Different Folks there in Kyoto.

Yeah.  Yeah:  personal reasons.

Mostly those personal reasons are, aren't they, for w.h.y. --- with another individual or 'different' group --- for why ( her or his justification and 'rational'ization re ) anyone's ... ... warring ? !

For whatever else is done --- because of "your personal reasons" --- make certain over and throughout all of that:  to gut the bitch in the belly.

As per some o' Those in Power w Dominion Over Her of The Contender:  http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1100998-contender and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0208874/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 .

But, most especially, this statement near its end:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlioUeIUuts&list=PLuPQ67nPIEBA-x88H6p_V-7J__0pX_kCI = " ... ... because of half - truths, lies and innuendos "

" simple as that "