Religion ‘Submit to your husbands’: Women told to endure domestic violence in the name of God

[Chief]

"Attend church sporadically".

No context other than them being non devout followers.Are they from poorer areas on average? Are there problems with unemployment and alcoholism greater than the general population?

I look at things a little more deeply than your agenda driven articles. I am not denying issues with religious organisations either.

Read the article. It has links to its supporting evidence. It talks about its many interviews with people whose lives have been touched by the issue.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Yeah that is what specifically drew my attention. Smacks of someone who is a bit of an outcast/misfit. Misses out on the bigger picture that said religion promotes (which most of the time is don't be a campaigner) or the benefit of belonging to a community.

Turns up when they are facing an internal crisis.

Dunno. Just a theory

Internal crises like drug or alcohol addiction, mental health issues, poverty etc would all be heavily associated with an increased risk of being a perpetrator of violence as well.

 

[kickazz]

Fringe church-goers are slightly more likely to be abusive.

The article outlines the evidence that this abuse is fostered under the 'headship' doctrine, and that even if it is the fringe church-goers, the church leaders are too often counseling abused men and women to stay in the relationship, be forgiving and patient. Unfortunately by the time the abused person goes to the church they are often only doing so because of real fear for their lives. The response across religions gets a "too little, too late" grade.

Then if the abused spouse does leave, they often leave the church and with it their support network.

Churches across the board too often decide that the meek are not at all blessed, they are a nuisance best dispensed with.

Yeah, churches' role in society is funny like that. Not all that pragmatic, but they do take on some tough gigs when it comes to dealing with the darker parts of human nature.

Having said that, they can be quite pragmatic, when it comes to self interest, as you allude to in your last paragraph.

 

[kickazz]

Fringe church-goers are slightly more likely to be abusive. Then frequent church-goers. Then non-church goers.

The article outlines the evidence that this abuse is fostered under the 'headship' doctrine, and that even if it is the fringe church-goers, the church leaders are too often counseling abused men and women to stay in the relationship, be forgiving and patient. Unfortunately by the time the abused person goes to the church they are often only doing so because of real fear for their lives. The response across religions gets a "too little, too late" grade.

Then if the abused spouse does leave, they often leave the church and with it their support network.

Churches across the board too often decide that the meek are not at all blessed, they are a nuisance best dispensed with.

Yeah. People cite the increasing divorce rate and say it's a bad thing. Dig a little deeper and one could well suggest the opposite.

Forgive each other, only God can truly judge is. Yeah nah.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Another thinly-veiled anti-Christianity thread by OP. Colour me surprised.

OP desperately wants Christianity to be as bad as Islam (we know the thread was really a link between headship and The Speaker's closing sentence) but even his heroes Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris disagree with him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Another thinly-veiled anti-Christianity thread by OP. Colour me surprised.

OP desperately wants Christianity to be as bad as Islam (we know the thread was really a link between headship and The Speaker's closing sentence) but even his heroes Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris disagree with him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Evangelical christians also make up the largest religious group in the United States which makes the statement in the study potting them meaningless without further information as it is comparing a larger population with smaller ones.

 

[Gough]

Another thinly-veiled anti-Christianity thread by OP. Colour me surprised.

OP desperately wants Christianity to be as bad as Islam (we know the thread was really a link between headship and The Speaker's closing sentence) but even his heroes Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris disagree with him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Could be a troll designed to sucker in angry little men like you too. Ever consider that?

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Could be a troll designed to sucker in angry little men like you too. Ever consider that?

No projecting happening here^

 

[Garlic muncher]

Could be a troll designed to sucker in angry little men like you too. Ever consider that?

Would that be a cheap troll ?

Then who is worse ?

 

[BEaston]

Internal crises like drug or alcohol addiction, mental health issues, poverty etc would all be heavily associated with an increased risk of being a perpetrator of violence as well.

No s**t, idiot. That's not what this specific study looked at though.

FFS can we just thread ban plebs that repeatedly show no interest in discussing the actual topic at hand? So many of these pondscum brains just clutter the s**t out of every single thread with their irrelevant bullshit to deflect away from stuff they'd rather ignore.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Could be a troll designed to sucker in angry little men like you too. Ever consider that?

I am not angry or little. If I recall correctly, you are short and always talk about stomping people. You are the epitome of napoleonic complex




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

No s**t, idiot. That's not what this specific study looked at though.

FFS can we just thread ban plebs that repeatedly show no interest in discussing the actual topic at hand? So many of these pondscum brains just clutter the s**t out of every single thread with their irrelevant bullshit to deflect away from stuff they'd rather ignore.

Evangelical christians that attend church regularly are less likely to be an abuser than evangelical christians that attend church sporadically.

Do more people need to attend church regularly to lessen the incidence of violence and abuse?

Maybe the situation is more complex than you can handle and the study wants an excuse to put blame somewhere.

If I make a statement that more crime is committed by black South Africans than white South Africans it is pretty meaningless without further inspection when one population is larger than the other yet this study does just that with the largest religous group and even then it gets selective by choosing non devout members yet uses that as a reason to attack the religion.

I do actually think the issue needs inspection but know a selective agenda driven conclusion when I see it.

 

[Fryman]

A 12-month ABC News investigation involving dozens of interviews with survivors of domestic violence, counsellors, priests, psychologists and researchers from a range of Christian denominations — including Catholic, Anglican, Baptist, Pentecostal and Presbyterian 

Wow... dozens of interviews. More than enough of a sample there to paint all Christians as wife bashers.

And I'm sure they controlled for all other factors such as alcohol, drug use, poverty etc.

 

[JCHolmes]

Would happen in all ''religions’’ in varying degrees around the world, no excuse though, none of them are excused. Get rid of them all. Problem solved. That way we wont have passive aggressive tit for tat s**t threads over whose religion is worse, or focusing on one religion as s**t and archaic, they all are.

 

[Seeds]

You looked for a study to match already held views of yours to give you a reason to post a thread expressing your hate of a religion.

What do you have to say about the culture of certain remote indigenous communities where women are abuse at astronomical rates compared to non aboriginal women?

Do you deny the levels of abuse suffered by Aboriginal women?

If not where do you assert most of that abuse is coming from?

Start your own topic if you want to talk about a completely different issue.

 

[Seeds]

Another thinly-veiled anti-Christianity thread by OP. Colour me surprised.

OP desperately wants Christianity to be as bad as Islam (we know the thread was really a link between headship and The Speaker's closing sentence) but even his heroes Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris disagree with him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

And what has a posters bias got to do with the facts? If you focus on the messenger rather then the message then you may as well admit the op is correct.

 

[Seeds]

Society needs to be weened off religion. The first stop is to stop giving them tax breaks for their land and business interests and the next is to stop allowing them to run schools. We atleast need some part of their week where children are encouraged to think critically and question the beliefs told to them by their parents and family. That is not going to occur at religious schools.

 

[Admiral Byng]

If you are not prepared to speak out about issues that can lead to the violence against Aboriginal or Muslim women you are a coward.

Deflection is the epitome of cowardice. The problem should be tackled wherever it rears it's ugly head, and often it needs a different strategy for different groups. But just to point the finger at someone else and say "leave me alone - what about them" is cowardice and denial.

The problem is being tackled in Aboriginal communities. What else do you think all the alcohol bans and welfare debit cards is all about?

 

[FredLeDeux]

If I make a statement that more crime is committed by black South Africans than white South Africans it is pretty meaningless without further inspection when one population is larger than the other
.

This is correct.

this study does just that with the largest religous group and even then it gets selective by choosing non devout members yet uses that as a reason to attack the religion.
.

This is false.

Read the report.

 

[BEaston]

Evangelical christians that attend church regularly are less likely to be an abuser than evangelical christians that attend church sporadically.

Do more people need to attend church regularly to lessen the incidence of violence and abuse?

Maybe the situation is more complex than you can handle and the study wants an excuse to put blame somewhere.

If I make a statement that more crime is committed by black South Africans than white South Africans it is pretty meaningless without further inspection when one population is larger than the other yet this study does just that with the largest religous group and even then it gets selective by choosing non devout members yet uses that as a reason to attack the religion.

I do actually think the issue needs inspection but know a selective agenda driven conclusion when I see it.

There's no helping you and your type.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

So let's look at the actual claim and respond to that, shall we?

As theology professor Steven Tracy wrote in 2008:

It is widely accepted by abuse experts (and validated by numerous studies) that one fourth to one third of North American women will be assaulted by an intimate partner in their life time and that evangelical men who sporadically attend church are more likely than men of any other religious group (and more likely than secular men) to assault their wives (Steven R. Tracy, “Patriarchy and Domestic Violence: Challenging Common Misconceptions,” JETS 50 [2007]: 573-94. For documentation of the widespread prevalence of physical and sexual abuse as well as the biblical affirmation that abuse is rampant, see Steven R. Tracy, Mending the Soul: Understanding and Healing Abuse (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 13-20, 225-27.

Your quote is taken from a footnote of that document which refers to this publication.
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/50/50-3/JETS_50-3_573-594_Tracy.pdf
Steven Tracy wrote this.
"These studies do find a link between conservative religion and domestic violence, but it is not the simple causal relationship the feminist model would predict. Rather, there is an inverse relationship between church attendance and domestic violence. Conservative Protestant men who attend church regularly are found to be the least likely group to engage in domestic violence, though conservative Protestant men who are irregular church attendees are the most likely to batter their wives.44 Thus current research disproves the feminist hypothesis that patriarchy is the single underlying cause of all abuse against women, though it strongly suggests that patriarchy plays some role in domestic violence."


Footnote 44 referred to this.
"44 Christopher G. Ellison and Kristin L. Anderson, “Religious Involvement and Domestic Violence among U.S. Couples,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 40 (2001) 269–86; Merlin B. Brinkerhoff, Elaine Grandin, and Eugen Lupri, “Religious Involvement and Spousal Violence: The Canadian Case,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 31 (1991) 15–31; Christopher G. Ellison, John P. Bartkowski, and Kristin L. Anderson, “Are There Religious Variations in Domestic Violence?” Journal of Family Issues 20 (1999) 87–113; W. Bradford Wilcox, Soft Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and Husbands (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004) 181–83. Similar trends were noted in an earlier non American study which found that the husband’s church attendance was an identifiable risk factor for wife assault: 11.2% of husbands who never attended church assaulted their wives. But only 2.2% of husbands who attended church at least monthly assaulted their wives, while 6.2% of husbands who attended church sporadically assaulted their wives: David M. Fergusson et al., “Factors Associated with Reports of Wife Assault in New Zealand,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 48 (1986) 410.

The most likely to batter their wives comment was in comparison of regular to irregular church goers.

Irregular can be broken down into the categories of sporadic, and never. The never attend church were the highest and nearly double that of sporadic attendees who themselves were nearly 3 times more likely to assault their wives than those who attended church at least once a month.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

There's no helping you and your type.

You have nothing of value to offer hence the sniping from the sidelines. Maybe research the topic if you want to engage in discussion and debate.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

This is correct.



This is false.

Read the report.

Go a little deeper and read the sources that the report got its information from and then see if you are being spun.

 

[Chief]

If Aboriginal women are 30-40 times more likely to be the victims of violence and abuse than non Aboriginal women do you believe that they have evangelical christian partners at highly disproportionate rates?

Legitimate question. I can feel a weak excuse threadban coming here.

A study published in the Lancet in 2015analysed data from 66 surveys across 44 countries, covering the experiences of almost half a million women.

It found that the greatest predictor of partner violence was “environments that support male control”, especially “norms related to male authority over female behaviour”.


I can keep repeating the parts of the article that you didn't read, or you can read the article before you post any more, or you can stop posting.

 

[Chief]

The most likely to batter their wives comment was in comparison of regular to irregular church goers.

Irregular can be broken down into the categories of sporadic, and never. The never attend church were the highest and nearly double that of sporadic attendees who themselves were nearly 3 times more likely to assault their wives than those who attended church at least once a month.

So, if you're going to be religious, at least do it in a crowd who can police the s**t you do, and cover it up when you stray?