I do wonder, from time to time, whether or not some conservative Republicans (of the religious type) actually object to Hillary Clinton's candidacy for President on grounds that have nothing to do with policy and her seeming ability to be malleable with the truth. Granted, I don't consider myself to be a big fan of the former Secretary of State, but given the two major party choices for President, she's got my vote. Anyway, and back to religious objections to Hillary Clinton, I think the central issue for some folks is the very basic idea that she is a woman who would hold authority over men.
In support of the above, I offer the following sample of Bible verses:
"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control."
(1 Timothy 2: 11-15)
"Wives, submit to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands."
(Ephesians 5: 22-24)
"The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they deserve to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."
(1 Corinthians 4: 34-35)
I could go on, but the point is made. It's actually pretty frightening when you think about it. Islam, for example, gets a fair amount of grief over the treatment of women (a tactic Donald Trump disastrously tried to use against the Khan family; citation HERE), yet the Christian Bible is full of language that seems far out of step with reality. Maybe that's the point, by the way, namely that the Bible paints a reality that is supposed to be not of this world.
Deep ponderings concerning the nature of sacred scripture aside for a moment, my point is this: Some conservative Christians in this country will not vote for any woman to hold an office such as that of President. Let that sink in for a moment or three. A related and interesting question is this: Why aren't more religious conservatives more overt about this basic objection? Could it be that even they realize how toxic of stand this would be, especially given the large percentage of the voting population that doesn't subscribe to the notion of women as being best for "silence, subservience and baby-making"?
Taking this to a deeper level and noting the rise of "religious freedom" laws, what if some folks actually claim that they have a right to disobey any laws created and/or signed by a female President?
Difficult questions for a difficult age.
Post a Comment