Philo, I think deep in your soul you know that is untrue. Disagreeing with the lack of women in the Church is not Christian bashing but why let commonsense get in the way of this debate.

This affects all women who wish to become involved in the Church and opens up opportunities in the future for younger women contemplating a career in the clergy. Would you ask the same question if all Church leaders were women and prevented men joining their ranks. I think not.

AJ Philips:>> Well, it’s one thing to say that anything’s possible, but it’s another to suggest the big bang could have been a wilful act as a way of saying “Ya reckon?” in response to my claim that none of the arguments for the existence for god hold.<<

AJ your lack of scope is tenacious; and your ability to misconstrue script is exemplary. I never proffered any defined arguments to whether there is a god or not. What I endeavored to do was justify doubt of certainty on the premise that what we see may not be all there is. If you cannot grasp the concept so be it.

pelican:>> Would you ask the same question if all Church leaders were women and prevented men joining their ranks. I think not.<<

Pelican we would have exactly the same resistance on exactly the same grounds, historical.

SOG
While I understand the resistance from a historical religious perspective, this does not make it fair nor imply continued discrimination should be sanctioned. Many things stem from a historical context but have evolved from higher learning, education and social change.

What are the reasons why women should not be admitted to the Church leadership - other than a commitment (or enslavement) to the historical context. Is that enough in itself.

sonofgolin: <"The logic in using Occam’s is apparent, but the logic of the physics we employ with Occam’s is only valid to 13 billion years ago and we are searching before that point. So anything is possible in a considered sense...>"

Maybe we're living on an atom of a way bigger reality of enormous others.

If our earth was an atom or part of one; what do you think the atom might be part of - creature, vegetable, mineral?

I like adventuresome thinking.

I tend to think that all things are possible until proven otherwise.

SOG

>> It is purely that there is a start time to existence as we understand it, and before existence I ponder on what was there and what motivated the explosion that created time and matter. Was it random or was it willful (sic). <<

You are making the assumption that there is a beginning and an end; for we creatures of earth that is true, we are born, we die. We have a linear perspective of time and space. We forget that our planet itself recycles, our atoms are reabsorbed into environment earth, which in turn will be absorbed by our sun when that star's nuclear reactor runs out of fuel to burn, at the same 'time' our milky way has at its core a black hole of such proportion as to eventually engulf our galaxy, expelling the contents where? Into another universe? Who knows? There are still debates as to whether the universe is contracting or expanding; at the moment the science suggests the universe is still expanding. We are not likely to discover any time soon whether there is or was a "wilful" mind behind all this. And even if it is true, this "mind" is so far beyond anything described in any paltry terrestrial religion as to be redundant.

Nice to ponder, but not to be used as a basis to discriminate against one gender of a species of life. Completely illogical in fact.