You still don't understand that not everyone can benefit so much from their parents' work, do you?
You're dodging the question. Why do you think the fact that I have benefited from my ancestors makes me lesser?
You are incapable of empathizing or even understanding the challenges faced by those born less privileged than you.
Do not mistake my refusal to abandon virtues and ideals in the face of hardships as a lack of empathy.
It's not even about if he can provide for me and my kids it's about my own independence so that, at the end of the day, I have something to fall back on. In my country there's a big big problem with men killing their wives, abusing them or financially manipulating them so they never leave them. I've grown up seeing my mother go through things no woman should ever go through. That's why I choose education and career.
What your mother went through is wrong and I'm sorry to hear that, and yet here you are because she chose to endure for your benefit. Would you rather not exist? What about your siblings? Should the human race just cease to procreate whenever there's hardship or even the potential of hardship?
If he beats me then yes lol.
Just to be clear you're totally fine with abandoning all virtues and ideals over the possibility of a worst case scenario?
Yes I would. Why is it so wrong to want to have something of my own. You'd be surprised but women have hobbies. I know what a shocker.
Hobbies are great but they should not be a priority above having children.
You're sheltered and privileged to the point where you do not realize that the vast majority of men can't be the only bread winner in the house.
You'd be surprised how much you can afford when you don't waste money on unnecessary luxuries.
A woman is better off having a higher education so she's independent and does not fully depend of her future husband.
You might have a point if you framed this as an unfortunate necessity in the face of modern reality.
Weird. Could have sworn you said "trade." And "absurd is the notion of married women having a career and their own income. A married woman is supposed to maintain the home and raise the kids."
Ah I see your confusion. I was speaking on the concept that women should put those things above having and raising kids. As in someone who chooses not to have kids because they'd rather pursue a career.
It's not a capitalized word, goof.
Okay my bad, I was trying to hit you with a cheap platitude.
Ah but lets unpack that definition you provided. What do you know about being divine, pious, or devout? And why do you insist that I am falling short of these things by advocating for loving, devoted marriages and raising children? Do you think its pious or devout to prioritize a career over children?
Sure reads like "college isn't important or useful." Which tells me you lacked and lack discernment.
If you really want to get into the weeds on this my view of college is that it is not important or useful for most people, and that going to college doesnt make someone better than someone who didn't. I got more value out of the connections I made with people I met through college than the formal education aspect of it. That isn't to say I didn't learn from the education, just that I could have learned all the same things through independent study. Did I lack discernment when I went to college? I don't know, probably. I think a lot of people do at that age. I certainly felt pressured to go to college because it was expected of me, and in hindsight I wish I'd taken a year off to consider it more thoroughly, but I had a scholarship that would have expired and without it I wouldnt have been able to afford college without resorting to predatory loans. Such is life.
Isaiah 55:8-9
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts,neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
I don't mean to come off as arrogant. I'm just incensed by the wanton abandonment of virtue on display in this thread.
Also, you quote scripture like a protestant. That is to say you've found some lines in the Bible that you think helps your argument, but you've inadvertently hoisted yourself by your own pitard here.
The scripture you cited is saying that the ways of God are not the ways of the world, and that they are higher than the world. In other words being true to God and living a virtuous life as he intended for us is often seen as foreign, wrong, and incomprehensible by people who themselves are of the world.
Personally I think the First Epistle of John conveys this point better than the book of Isaiah, but that could just be New Testament bias.
1 John 2:15-17 - 15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If any one loves the world, love for the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world. 17 And the world passes away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides for ever.