Myself in Public

Religion. Can it Comment on Men in Skirts

This page and next 4 have been part of this site since 2011 because in early 2011 when I started searching "men in skirts" there were quite a few who stated they were Christians, were very negative on the subject but the women openly talked about wearing trousers and it was a right and allowed in the Bible. Duteronomy 22:5 always quoted. Double standards within religion – any religion – does not surprise me, in fact that is why I have gone from being a church goer to a non-attendee. I do not take any Religious Book literally, not just because of this subject but other hypocritical issues. Take out all the stories and wording in the Bible and Jesus only had one simple rule – it is how you behave and hold yourself during your life towards others near or far from you. It is not what you say in church and do the opposite in real life. Every Church of England service includes the prayer, forgive me father for I have sinned, and then watch some parishioners in day to day life afterwards. I am sure this is true for all religions.

In November 2017 after yet another Christian family objected to a trans gender pupil, the topic of what boys and girls can and cannot wear was raised again within religion. The Arch Bishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, actually said in public that a boy in a dress is not a problem. On the next page of this site under the Religious Section I provide 6 links to different articles on this.

Although by 2017 many of these statements about women can wear mens clothing but men cannot of womens from a religious aspect have greatly decreased but they do still pop up from time to time. This section of my site has remained but as you can see I am still monitoring. These next few pages cover many double standards from the Bible, not just men in skirts.

Despite what you read below I do accept a person around the year zero and that this person had one simple message of tolerance, understanding and understanding attitudes towards each other. I do believe that we, this planet and the universe are here for a reason. I cannot subscribe to, therefore do not partake, in this human religion that has followed for its persistent failings in itself in what this person in the year zero proclaimed. I am not an indepth reader of all religions of the world but from what I see and hear in this modern world, all religions suffer from the same short comings - human tainting for individualistic gain. With regards Western  religious faith, Christianity, it certainly does not uphold the values of this person, simply immersed itself in poltical pursuation, money, power, greed, dominance and an attitude of intolerance and non-understanding.


Churches/religions around the world are based upon human writings, interpretation and preaching. Yes they all say it is the ‘word of God’ but who says? The Christian Bible for example was produced some 400 years after the death of Jesus, by humans. Initially as separate stories from 400 years ago. The Bible was compiled in 313 AD by amalgamating several books written under the Christian movement after the death of Christ at the request of the Roman Emporer Constantine. The Roman empire that contolled the area we now refer to collectively as the Middle East pre Christ and afterwards. Their Religion was Pagan and many Christian symbols and dates have connection with Paganism many Christians disagree with this, but historic evidence confirms this. It is worth noting that even the Vatican City that we have today did not exist pre-1929. It was part of the Rione of Borgo. on 11th February 1929 the Lateran Agreement created the Vatican City with full independent sovereignty. In 1870 the 11 regions of Italy became unified and the Popes holdings were left in an uncertain position. I do not deny that the area occupied by the Vatican City has not been holy ground pre 1929. It was. There has been a church on that site for at least 1000 years before the current St Peters Basilica, which was constructed 1506-1626, and this site is purported to be over the tomb of St Peter, crucified around AD67. The area now known as the Vatican City was baron pre AD40 when Emperorer Caligula started construction of the Circus now known as St Peters Square. The obelisk came from Egypt, Heliopolis, by Emperor Caligula - remember at that time Paganism was the religion of the Roman empire. The Grand approach was constructed by Benito Mussolini after the Lateran Agreement.


The Roman Catholic Church, early Christianity, stems from the origins of Emporer Constantine some 300 years after Emporer Caligula and is the original Christian faith having been legalised in AD 313 known as the Edict of Milan. This I understand stems from Constantine before battle seeing a cross above the Sun with words saying Victory. He ordered crosses be put on all the Roman soldiers shields ahead of a battle that day and yes he was victorious. Previous to AD 313 early Christians were persecuted and the first formal recorded persecutions were in AD 64. The other Christian based faiths are all break away groups. The American one is only from the modern day United States which started in 1763. The Church of England is only from 1537 and the UK Methodists, Quakers, Refomists etc are all break away groups of the Church of England. Even the Methodist movement split further within themselves. Pre 1537, the UK was Catholic and under Rome. All these Christian groups all believe in the same God, Jesus and Mary, yet have all formed because they didn't agree with certain aspects of the writings and expectations at the time. It should be noted that as long as humans have had a belief in a God then as soon as one disagrees with any docterine, a break away group forms. All Religions are like this. A lot of Christanity shares alot of common domominators with the Muslim faith, they actually acknowledge the same God! The main difference is that according to the Muslim faith Jesus was a Prophet, not the son of God. Mohammed according to the Muslim faith was the last Prophet on Earth. As that was in the 6th Century and we had several previously, then perhaps God has forsaken the Earth since we have had none since! The Muslim faith is older than Christianity so we must have a break away group even then.


I find the Catholic churches attitude towards birth control very interesting. For an intelligent God it is rather stupid to allow uncontrolled population increase to a point the world cannot sustain itself. 


I find it very hard that in all wars both sides say they are representing God. The Bible does say those who live by the sword, die by the sword. - and


I also cannot understand why Christianity under the Catholic Church and other Christian based churches did not allow women Bishops although it has in the UK in 2015 it did, yet not so for other religions. The Church of England made females priests in 1994 but as at 2014 female priests could not become Bishops. On the 14th July 2014, after several attempts to change this the Church of England finally came to its senses and has allowed female priests to become Bishops. I have met seveal Christian religious zealots within the Church of England who will, even in 2014 not recogonise female priests. According to the Bible God accepts all those who are not sinners. No where in the Bible does it forbid women priests. Personally I do not think it matters who preaches the Bible if they truly believe it. I don't in the sense it is portrayed by religion but do believe it was written at a time of great confusion, power struggles politically, power struggles between humans, power struggles between man and woman, occupation by a foriegn force etc. Women long before Christianity had always been prominent within Religions of the times, this is obvious from the Greek and Roman stories of the time. Womens decline in religion started with the Pagan religion being denounced and Christianity recognised worshipping only one God, a male. I understand it was Emporer Theodosis III in AD 394 pushed women out of positions and status wthin religion and basicaly reduced them to the other rank they held, 2nd class citizens. Paganism was abandoned, with all remaining Pagan symbols and statutes taken down, Christanity with one God embraced fully.


The status of women throughout history has always been "2nd class" except where authority suited itself. Movements, since the Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century, culminating with Feminisim of 1970's were good in this respect but I do think Feminisim has gone a bit to far and now at times are as bad as the male patriarchy complained about, my view. These days lost alot of good qualities they could still portray. Having said that when you look at world religions both men and women have always played 'second fiddle' to the religious hierarchy that exists. It is only in these latter centuries in the Western World have ordinary citizens had some position and share of wealth even if you do not think it is a fair balance under the Wests Capitalism regime. However, many other countries not only suppress the women but also its citizens generally in favour of a few at the top and that is often done in the name of religion.


Christianity is no different to the many other religions of the world, biased in favour of those who have a vested interest for being in 'the club'. Even in the West many active members of their religions are in my view as zealous as they claim many Muslims or to some the Muslim faith is with regards their views and opinions. These views and opinions turn into violence both physical and by words yet because they consider themselves right and representing God it is OK. Religion succeeds by 'brainwashing' its members into a specific belief and because many humans behave like Lemmings, they simply follow. They do not look independently at the facts and the one simple message that the Bible simply portrays - it is how you behave and hold yourself towards others, near and far from you.


When in 313 the first Bible was produced it amalgamated many books on Christianity drawn up over the previous 300 years. However many were not included and have not been since as they were considered not suitable. There is evidence of this as some of these books still exist but conveniently suppressed so as not to undermine the "true church". It is this editing of the truth that casts further doubt on the strict docterine of Christianity and other religions. It is like when in the Bible Jesus said do not have materialistic items, or build monuments to God. Look at what the Church did and manipulated people retaining wealth and power for itself. It was not until the greater population became more educated and had more reasoning power that religion has lost alot of support over these last few hundred years.


Christians and other Religions frown upon same sex couples that live together. Lesbian stems from Latin indicating same sex couples so it is not a "modern quirk". Lesbian was used by the 6th Century Greek Poet from the Island Lesbos where women were left with her for instruction on cultural edification. Little of her works is left but what is describes womens daily lives, relationships and rituals. She focused on the beauty of women and her love for them. Gay I understand did not exist in English pre 12th Century and was from old French 'gai' meaning joyful, carefree. It had immorality associations by the 14th Century but certainly by the 17th Century. However, lets look at the Church on this point. It still is dominated by males only. Until these latter years 100% male based. The Bible is based upon the 12 Apostles of Christ, all males according to the Bible. Mary and Mary Magdoline are mentioned but the Church goes to great pains to label Mary Magdoline as a prostitute and refutes her being the wife of Jesus. Basically the Church is backing up a theory that perhaps Jesus was Gay, Lesbian, himself if he lived and shared his life with other men! On this area I find it interesting that Christians are so negative on same sex couples they actually contradict the teachings of the Bible when it says that God accepts all. Also Christians say same sex couples are forcing their views upon the world, are not the Christians as to other Religions.


Martin Luther 1483-1546. A German monk, priest and a professor of thology. He disagreed, and quite strongly the statement of the church, Catholic, pre the spliting of the Christian faith in Europe, that freedom from Gods punishment for sins could be acquired by payment of money. He refused to retract all of his writings and in 1520 Pope Leo X excommunicated him and the Holy Roman Emperor of Germany Charles V condemed him an outlaw. His theology challenged the authority of the Pope by saying that it was only the Bible that had the devine source of knowledge. It was not uncommon for the church from the beginnings right up until citizens became more literate and questioned. The introduction of the printing press allowed literature to be more freely distributed and eventually translating the Bible from Latin. Martin Luther instigated the Bible to be written in German which was the beginning that led to the King James Bible into English in 1611. Pre 1600's the reading of literature was confined to those in the higher reaches of Society and even less so in the earlier periods of human history. It was this progression that started the splitting up of the Catholic faith into alternate religous names. The Church of England was created by Henry VIII to get his divorce but others were because of 'inhouse' interpretation of this book to suit others needs. Hereatics often burnt alive at the stake were literally preaching and setting standards on a strict docterine of the Bible not the politics of the church that was corrupt with greed for wealth and power. Henry VIII is credited by many and the Church for the disolution of the monasteries of England because the Catholic Church would not grant his divorce. Actually the monasteries were disolved because they had become so wealthy and powerful with the political affairs of England that the Crown of England was in danger of losing its position.


The Church also conveniently keeps quiet about its early days, I'm talking pre 1700, of its underhand dealings to keep valid information suppressed. Initially by death of those they called heretics, later as public became more astute by words to try and counter any representation that cast doubt on the faith. The Church was heavily involved in suppressing any findings when science was understood and developed into a subject that could explain things with specific facts. The Church was also against findings that were discovered in Egypt.


Leonardo Da Vinci (1452 - 1519), Gallileo (1564 - 1642), Sir Isaac Newton (1642 - 1727) and Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882) are just some of those who fell foul of the churches attempts to be silenced because of their scientific announcements.


If these religous books of faiths are truly devine and the word of God then why have religions throughout the world, throughout time split and split again to preach their own docterines of the word of God? Why suppress and with violence those who had alternate ideas based upon fact? It still goes on to this day and Muslims -v- Chritianity has raged ever since Chritians started the Crusades by taking Jerusalem from the Muslims because Jerusalem is the corner stone of Christianity back in the 1100's, nearly 1000 years ago!.


Personally, all Religions have alot to answer for the troubles of the world, but then world Governments and politicians are not much different.


We cannot even these days with records quote history correctly when someone wants to portray an event or circumstances they believe in. Hollywood is one example where some films based upon fact are altered to suit audience attention, a classic to me is the Sound of Music. Look at wars, the winning side glorifies its best points, keeps quiet about the errors they make or highlights the kindness the 'enemy’ did – not all on the opposing side are the enemy - eg. Schindlers List and the sinking of Laconia, these latter two examples have only come out to the wider general public decades after the event. Look at how these days books written decades and centuries ago are trying to be changed because they do not conform to current beliefs and behaviours. It did then and that’s history. It shows how we have all aspired to be a more tolerant and understanding Society.


I do believe a person with good intentions towards his country, occupied by a foreign army (Romans) did exist in the year zero. I’m sure that person tried to bring hope and peace and provide guidance as a whole on behaviour etc to the then population of the world. Remember the world as we know it did not exist then. The World was the Middle East as we now refer to that area. They did not know of South America, Australia etc. Likewise the inhabitants of those regions didn’t know about the area we call the Middle East. Remember new worlds were still being discovered much later for example the USA was not discovered by Europeans until the late 1400’s and Australia until 1700’s.  It was the Roman Empire that brought UK and Europe into the world with regards reference to the world the Bible was based upon and England wasn’t occupied by the Romans until well after the death of Jesus. In the Dark Ages of history, i.e. after the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 5th century where Europe was left abruptly to its own devices, the Bible appeared in Europe. Throughout English history the church both Catholic and C of E have controlled people with its writings and preaching's, only in the latter centuries have church attendances dwindled due to public becoming more aware to events and manipulating bodies. Look at how the monasteries dominated over the UK population between 1100 and early 1500’s. The Abbies prospered and locals suffered. They had more power and wealth than the Crown. The Bible appeared long after Jesus and that is what is thrust before us as the doctrine of behaviour. the Bible contradicts itself, it is written at a time totally different to ours with different meanings and interpretations to events that happened then not in the modern world.


The "next" and "previous" buttons on the bottom of each page work on internal ID numbers which are not numeric for the actual next page. It will bring up only the next numeric ID page for this site. To follow each section on the site in order use the left hand side menus throughout. Basically ignore these "next" and "previous" buttons. Must be a failing of free templates!


Right Click

No right click