home
RSS
August 12th, 2011
12:10 PM ET

Bachmann faces theological question about submissive wives at debate

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN)– Thursday night in the Fox News GOP debate in Ames, Iowa, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota, was asked by columnist Byron York whether she would be "submissive to her husband" if she were elected president.

Before the congresswoman had a chance to answer, a chorus of boos rang down from the audience.

"Thank you for that question, Byron," Bachmann responded with a wry smile. "Marcus and I will be married for 33 years this September 10. I'm in love with him. I'm so proud of him. What submission means to us, it means respect. I respect my husband. He's a wonderful godly man and great father.

"He respects me as his wife; that's how we operate our marriage," she continued. "We respect each other; we love each other. I've been so grateful we've been able to build a home together. We have wonderful children and 20 foster children. We've built a business and life together, and I'm very proud of him."

"She answered it the most appropriate way in the context it was being asked. She was being asked a deeply theological question in front of millions of Americans," said Gary Marx, the executive director of the Faith and Freedom Coalition. "That's why there was such a strong and visceral booing over the very premise of the question."

Marx, who was in the balcony at the debate Thursday, said that for Iowa evangelicals, this is a nonissue.

"Most evangelicals know it's not easy to teach in a 30-minute sermon on Sunday. It's impossible to answer in a minute sound bite. Her answer about respect is the only one that can be given," he said.

The question of wives being submissive to their husbands comes from a passage in the New Testament in Paul's letter to the Ephesians. The letter was originally written in Greek, and there are various translations of the Greek word Paul uses.

"Whatever someone thinks Paul means of submission of wives to husbands ... it doesn't leave any room for exploitation," said David Matthewson, an associate professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary. "I would say her response was very consistent with the text."

In the New International Version translation of the Bible, the version most preferred by evangelical Christians and nondenominational churches, a camp Bachmann has said she belongs to, Ephesians 5:22-24 are translated as:

"Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything."

The letter goes on to say in verse 25:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her."

"The English word 'submit' is as good a translation as any without using a bunch of words. The problem, though, is the word 'submit' in English carries connotations for most readers that may not have been there in the Greek," Mathewson said. "In English, we think of forced submission or exploiting. ... I don't think that's in the Ephesians passage."

In the King James Version, the first mass-produced English translation of the Bible, the word is translated as "submit."

In Eugene Peterson's translation of the Bible, "The Message," which aims to use more common English, he translates submissive as "understand and support your husbands in ways that show your support for Christ."

Historically, the fifth chapter of Ephesians has been taken in context of Paul's writings to mean Christian spouses should operate as loving equals, though the word "submissive" has long been a divisive one for Christian women.

"It seems it's been, in the 20th century, to have caused a lot of issues in North American Christianity," Mathewson said.

Former Alaska Gov. Sara Palin, another prominent evangelical politician, weighed in on the issue Friday in Iowa.

Palin told CNN's Don Lemon, "That's her opinion, that, to her, submission to her husband means respecting her husband, and I respect my husband, too."

Lemon asked, "If (husband) Todd said don't run, would you not run?"

"I can't imagine my husband ever telling me what to do politically," Palin responded. "He has never told me what to do when it comes to a political step, and I appreciate that. I respect you for that, Todd; thank you."

Bachmann identifies herself as an evangelical Christian. Her congressional office said recently that she has been attending a nondenominational church as her schedule allows.

She has shown over the years that she is fluent in "Christianese," using words and phrases that ring true to evangelical listeners.

She has long been a darling of evangelical voters, serving as keynote speaker at anti-abortion events in Washington and making the rounds at prayer rallies at the Capitol. It is one of the reasons she is expected to do well in Iowa, where the GOP base is filled with evangelical voters.

Her faith has caused a few bumps in the road in the campaign. Her husband's Christian counseling program came under fire by critics for a controversial therapy. She formally pulled her membership in her former church days before she formally announced that she was seeking the White House.

But Marx points out that fielding a question like this in a debate only helps her. "In Iowa, it reiterates that evangelical identity she has."

And, he noted, the last Republican to win the Iowa caucus in 2008, former Southern Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee, got asked a lot of questions about the finer points of his faith, too.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Belief • Christianity • Church and state • Michele Bachmann • Politics

soundoff (1,672 Responses)
  1. Faith

    What happened to USA? Why are there so many Christianity-haters lately? Christianity is like a mother to USA. God-haters sound like insane aliens hijacking the Earthlings' strongest nation. They should be shipped into the space.

    August 12, 2011 at 1:04 pm |
    • Anne

      wow, I think it's time for you medication...

      August 12, 2011 at 1:06 pm |
    • Sank

      I am a Christian. But the question this man made was asked in sarcasm. He will answer to God. For we are not living in the stone ages and very few religions of today demand a woman be a submissive slave to her husband. This sounds more like Islam and the koran worshiper than a Christian. Get real pal before someone rocks you one.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:08 pm |
    • Larry

      It isn't christianity, it's preaching to the people and using it as a platform. Separation of church and state.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
    • Faith

      Anne, I know as a non-Westerner; the greatness of the West(America) is only in Christianity, nothing else. You guys are as barbaric as any of us if you didn't have the Bible. Get that fact straight forever.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:12 pm |
    • Faith

      You secular Americans know nothing about balance. That's why the world calls you ignorant and uneducated.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:13 pm |
    • Anne

      Actually, Faith (although I have trouble believing you believe in anything but yourself), I am an atheist! I couldn't care less about which religion you or anyone else is because I honestly don't care. What does disturb me deeply are idiots like you who go around preaching that their own view is the best and nothing else will do.

      That's called extremism and there is actually a war going on to combat that around the world... get your facts straight and don't pretend to know me or what I think.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:15 pm |
    • Anne

      An another thing, don't call it America, it's the US. The US is the country, America is a continent!

      August 12, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
    • Faith

      Anne, atheists massacre people all around the world everywhere. I feel sorry for your name. Make North Korea your home. Don't pollute USA, a nation Christians created.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:18 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Anne: Faith is a troll. Don't waste your time.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Sank
      It seems that you're implying that the Bible is NOT innerrant and can/should be amended based on the cultural zeitgeist.
      If the statements regarding misogyny, slavery, flat earth, hom.ose.xuality, ritual sacrifice, dietary restrictions, etc. are all up for reinterpretation, then why not discard the rest as well?

      August 12, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
    • Anne

      You f*****g idiot, first I'm not from the US and second ALL wars have ALWAYS been waged in the name of some GOD! So explain to me how it is that atheists are responsible for wars and massacre???

      August 12, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
    • Anne

      @SeanNJ, you should have advised earlier... 🙂

      I hate religious nut jobs like that, I try to teach my kids everything that I possibly so that when they are old enough they can choose to believe or not in whatever is most comforting to them. and then, you have idiots like that who go around imposing their views and when my kids hear that, it takes me days to undo the damage.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
    • Faith

      Anne, don't pollute Canada, either. Stalin, Mao, Kim, Castro, Pol Pot and other atheists killed over billions while Christians rescued 7 billions. Any group's atrocities are nothing comparing to that of atheists last century alone. Even Nazis did not kill that many. Except for the genocide of the Jews, atheists were far worse killers than the Nazi Germans.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
    • CrazyOwlLady

      Faith is typical of fundie Xtians who called disagreement with their religion "hate". I grew up in a religiously diverse neighborhood. No other people but fundie Xtians felt compelled to shove their religious beliefs down other's throats, or condemn them because they didn't go to their particular flavor of church. Faith, if anything, your words don't bring people to Jesus - they disgust them and push them away. Maybe you should follow your Bible's advice and sit down and shut up and be a quiet little submissive Xtian woman.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
    • Martin T

      Faith, I wonder if you are just some ten year old trying to get attention. Also, Atheists have killed many, but never in the name of Atheism, because atheism is NOT a religion; however, there have been countless deaths and killings in the name of a god or gods. Do the research, not just the Christian god, but all gods. You should speak on subject for which you have some knowledge.

      August 12, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      @ Faith: It's not Jesus we hate: its the intolerant rubes who have a shred of truth gleaned in a moment of rare insight that they don't know what to do with that we detest. Don't confuse your faith with Jesus, since they are rarely, if ever connected. Your comments on here are not indicative of a person who gets it and to think otherwise is an act of pure arrogance on your part.

      August 12, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
    • MattL

      Saying Christianity is the mother of the US is an arrogant affront to everything the founders of our nation fought for. A key principle of the founding was not Christianity but the freedom of religion, the freedom for the individual to choose. Many founders just happened to be Christian, which was common for the culture. To tie the US to a religion goes against much of their plight.

      I believe she completely avoided the question, which even if asked as a theological question isn't inherently theological... it's a completely valid question that has theological implications. Will her husband have authority over her as the president, basically... which is more than fair since you must then consider if you would want to elect her and her husband.

      People may get offended since this leads to theological ties and religious issues but if you boil the question down it is completely valid and she completely didn't answer it.

      August 12, 2011 at 8:13 pm |
    • bailoutsos

      Too many wars because America believes "God" is on its side.

      August 12, 2011 at 8:15 pm |
    • dantheman

      Actually, "Faith", the founding fathers specifically intended for Christianity to NOT be a tenet of this nation. Read the Treaty of Tripoli, or any biography on the founding fathers (they weren't christian!).

      August 13, 2011 at 12:09 am |
    • jon

      dantheman – many of the founding fathers were Christian, and quite a few were Deists. Except for a few figures (such as Thomas Paine) they were not atheists. No amount of historical revisionism can change the facts.

      August 13, 2011 at 12:25 am |
    • pfeffernusse

      Yes, jon, some of the Founding Fathers were men of faith. No one is denying that. Thomas Paine, as you noted. Also, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Ethan Allen, and Benjamin Franklin were all casual deists, agnostics, or atheists. However, the men of the Continental Congress were keenly aware of what happened when religion was involved in law and were determined that this NOT be the case with the new United States.

      August 13, 2011 at 11:20 am |
    • sevenseas

      Since the belief in nothing is still belief, doesn't that mean Atheism is a religion? In much the same way the number 0 while having no value is still a number.

      August 14, 2011 at 1:19 pm |
    • steve

      dear Faith, you are a misguided soul. CHRISTIANS DID NOT CREATE THIS COUNTRY. your ability to craft history based on your mythical religious beliefs is frightening.

      religion is a man made myth, believe it if it makes you feel better but it has NOTHING to do with politics or this country.

      August 14, 2011 at 11:41 pm |
  2. MTATL67

    SUBMISSIVE – characterized by tendencies to yield to the will or authority of others
    RESPECT – The condition of being esteemed or honored
    Yes, yes I see how the definition of these two words are the same and interchangeable.
    Typical politician BS say something without actually saying anything at all.
    She did not answer a damn thing.

    August 12, 2011 at 1:00 pm |
    • Stevie7

      I actually think she answered a lot – she will use her religion as a tool to obtain power and will mold her religious needs not based upon personal beliefs of conviction, but rather on what is most likely to get her elected.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:26 pm |
    • Jair

      Too true, too true. Thankfully she is extremely unlikely to be elected.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      She is a well-trained parrot, nothing more. She does not have a speck of original thought in her.

      August 12, 2011 at 2:31 pm |
  3. Reality

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5&version=NIV

    Ephesians, CHAPTER 5-

    "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. "

    August 12, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • hahahaha nice

      Nice post dude!

      August 12, 2011 at 7:48 pm |
  4. Anne

    supposedly a developed nation, only in the US would religion play a role in politics!!!

    Bunch of moron!

    August 12, 2011 at 12:58 pm |
    • jon

      Strong Christian history, still has a strong presence – and STILL the only superpower in the world. Where are you from?

      August 13, 2011 at 12:22 am |
  5. w w

    Ms. Bachmann answered in the correct way. It is society and culture that has changed the perception of 'Submission' into something negative. Submission is Respect, whether to your spouse, an employer, the law, an educator, a superior officer, etc.
    It is unfortunate that candidates who have declared themselves to be of Evangelical faith are being targeted by these types of questions. It would be informative and more encompassing, if moderators in future debates would ask questions pertaining to Judaism, Mormonism, Islam or other belief systems. If they ask of one, they should ask of all.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:56 pm |
    • MTATL67

      I don't think she answered anything.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:01 pm |
    • Larry

      Maybe ask questions about issues and leave religioun out of politics.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:14 pm |
    • BRC

      @Larry,
      I completely agree with you... unfortuantely a number of candidates are making their personal faith an issue. If you do that, it becomes fair game. I, for one, would be genuinly uncomfortable if the President was someone who followed the bible to the letter.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:30 pm |
    • Jair

      Bachmann has spoken of the importance of her faith to a degree where it must be examined. Also, this BS about "sumbission" meaning something different today is not accurate. My mother is a 60 yr old christian. She is submissive to my father, due to both religion and culture. If she were elected, my father would really make the final call. That is the issue at hand. Is Bachmann submissive to her husband, to the effect that electing her would by proxy be electing her husband. Current translations of the Bible mean nothing. What does Michelle Bachmann believe or how does she intend to act on a policy?

      August 12, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
    • Fr33th1nk3r

      "It does not mean, that women should just give up every sense of individuality and wait on their husbands' desires hand and foot."

      Actually, if you read the verse, it most certainly DOES say just that. Not sure how many different ways you can interpret "obey your husbands as if they were the Lord".....more logical hijinks and Christians chasing their own tail trying to make Bronze-Aged belief systems relevant to today's society.

      But we can respect you for trying...

      August 12, 2011 at 6:51 pm |
    • Tex71

      And yet you will NEVER hear an evangelical calling for husbands to "submit" to their wives. NEVER.

      August 12, 2011 at 10:39 pm |
    • steven harnack

      Read the post above. You don't get to change the definitions of words to portray something that you may wish that they meant. Either stick to the actual meanings or just admit that something written 2,000 years ago no longer has any validity.

      August 14, 2011 at 10:01 pm |
  6. Faith

    Americans never left the sweet cradle of the gentlest Christianity they compare everything with Nazis or Taliban. Maybe they really need some oppressive pagan foreign forces in their land to taste what real life on earth is like.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:56 pm |
    • MomOf3

      Try taking two of the red pills with lunch...

      August 12, 2011 at 1:23 pm |
    • Fr33th1nk3r

      "The Western women are too strong for no good reason. Battling with Indians is over. Be submissive to man like a good woman. Don't let the less-confident white men marry Asian women because the Chinese men will need a lot of women because of the female-shortage."

      WOW, YOU TRULY ARE INSANE, AREN'T YOU? WHILE READING YOUR BLATHERING POSTS, I AM SILENTLY HOPING THAT YOU ARE AN ATHEIST MASQUERADING AS A CHRISTIAN AS A PARODY, AND NOT ACTUALLY AS NUTTY AS YOUR POSTS SUGGEST. HAVE YOU PAID A VISIT TO YOUR FAMILY PSHYCHOLOGIST LATELY, BY CHANCE?

      August 12, 2011 at 7:00 pm |
    • Les

      Faith, I think you need to read the history of your religion. Xtianity entered politics in the 50s with the inane "In God We Trust" motto was adopted. What god was meant was not mentioned. I am a Pagan. And the Xtian Church mur-dered 12,000,000 of my people during the Inquisition and the Protestant Witch Trials. Giving credit where it's due the vast majority of these atrocities were committed by the Protestants. The entire history of Xtian activity has been one of "love God or die" coupled with a "k-ill them all. God will sort out His own" rationale. BTW, NAZI Germany was backed by the Roman Catholic Church. From what planet do you hail?

      August 15, 2011 at 10:57 am |
  7. Reality

    Obviously, Mr. Marrapodi was a bit tired when he wrote his commentary i.e. it is Ephesians chapter 5 verses 22-24 not Chapter 2. Maybe a secret word filter is needed to check on the comments of said moderator. Strange that Marrapodi and his buddy can use words like "s-ex" and "h-o-mo-s-exuality" without using separators but we cannot because of the inane word filter forced upon us.

    Professor Chilton pulls no punches in criticizing one of the founders of Christianity. Basically Paul was a "prude". An excerpt for Chilton's book,

    "He (Paul) feared the turn-on of women's voices as much as the sight of their hair and skin..... At one point he even suggests that the sight of female hair might distract any angels in church attendance (1 Cor. 11:10). Simply add Paul's thinking about women to the list of flaws in the foundations of Christianity.

    Professor Chilton btw is a Professor of Religion at Bard College and a priest at the Free Church of St. John in Barrytown, NY.

    Hmmm, do you think maybe that Mo's scribes simply enhanced Paul's thinking about women when they wrote the koran??? Absolutely!!!!

    To be fair, however, most contemporary NT scholars have concluded that the Epistle to the Ephesians was written by a pseudo-Paul. Obviously, M. Buchannen should have noted this in her response indicating she is not well versed in modern Christianity. And obviously, Marrapodi is also not well versed in modern Christianity.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
  8. curious

    These are the questions u ask a woman who runs for office.

    hmmmm. wonder what kind of q this would be when a woman attends a job interview?

    August 12, 2011 at 12:52 pm |
    • wonder

      and look at the number of men are posting their "insights" to this question

      August 12, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • MomOf3

      In a private-sector job interview, it would be inappropriate and also illegal (unless she were being hired by a church). But POTUS is the farthest thing from a private-sector job, and I think it goes to show her character.

      She made this a topic when she made her speech saying her husband told her to go to college for tax-law, and she was submissive as the bible says wives should be. Not all Americans are comfortable with this, and rightfully so. If Marcus Bachmann wants to be President, maybe he should run...

      August 12, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
    • tallulah13

      She is interviewing for a job. It's a job that requires leadership and the ability to answer the hard questions. I think that the voters have the right to know if she is going to be influenced by a non-elected individual on matters of state, on the basis of her religion. It's one thing to listen to advice from a spouse, quite another to let that person decide national policy.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:32 pm |
  9. Texas Doc

    Interesting that her views are almost identical to the Taliban.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • Entil'za

      How often have you questioned or known a Taliban member?

      August 12, 2011 at 12:54 pm |
  10. Doc Vestibule

    A good Christian woman should be silent, submissive, subservient and filled with shame for the curse her gender forced on humanity.

    "Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die"
    Ecclesiasticus, 25:19
    I Corinthians 14: 34, 35 "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."
    "... 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."
    Timothy 2:12-14

    August 12, 2011 at 12:37 pm |
    • Faith

      Yes, the world is better if women are quiet. America has to many Bible-illiterate feminized men, so we need every Christian on the stage.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:52 pm |
    • Anne

      Thank God I'm not a good christian woman!!!

      August 12, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • Faith

      "Anne of Green Gables" was written by a pastor's wife, a nice Christian woman.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Faith/Zelda/Adelina/Fairgarden/etc. ad nauseum
      By your own admission, you should remain silent then!
      If you try and teach anyone anything about the Bible, you're condeming yourself to hell.
      Keep quiet.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:58 pm |
    • Faith

      Stupid, barbaric men actually want every woman to shut up. Honest and honorable men admit the truth from whomever it is mentioned.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:07 pm |
    • MomOf3

      And when you start speaking the truth...we'll listen.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:31 pm |
  11. Faith

    Women should be submissive to men who are submissive to God. Both need correct theology and proper role plays from it. Christian women pray for men who are ungodly to be saved or to repent, and the submission to God comes over all. We NEVER submit to ungodly orders.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • Rev. Rick

      Faith said – "Both need correct theology and proper role plays from it."

      And whose theology would that be? Baptist? Catholic? Lutheran? Mrs. Bachmann's?

      August 12, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Faith

      @Rick, it's called Biblical. Most Christian denominations agree. Just pick a Christian, not heathen.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:46 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Rev. Rick
      Yeah Rev – what kind of Christian goes around encouraging cooperation, tolerance, charity and humility?
      Real Christians, like Faith, condemn this and that from a fiery pulpit, pointing the fiery finger of eternal damnation at anyone who doesn't agree with them.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • Faith

      Doc-, that's because you are uneducated on Canadian history. You can't even sing O Canada in full verses.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
    • MomOf3

      Faith – You're comments are so bizarre, they're not even funny anymore...

      August 12, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
    • Normon

      @Faith,
      How about the Church of Jesus Christ? They should be Christian, not heathen, right?

      p.s.
      I think there full name is Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints (FLDS).

      August 12, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      Let me guess: you are going to tell us everything we need to know?

      August 12, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • No

      Why would I want to sing O Canada in Arizona? (Idiot)

      August 12, 2011 at 9:24 pm |
  12. Rev. Rick

    Quoting from the article: "The question of wives being submissive to their husbands comes from a passage in the New Testament in Paul's letter to the Ephesians. The letter was originally written in Greek, and there are various translations of the Greek work (word?) Paul uses."

    So right away we have three problems.

    1) 80% of bibilical scholars do not believe that Paul (who never even met Jesus) wrote the book (letter) of Ephesians – research it folks, it's true.

    2) the original letter to the Ephesians was written in Greek and there are "various translations" of the Greek work (word?) that Paul uses.

    3). If Mrs. Bachmann is going to appeal to conservative Christian voters by using her faith as a calling card, she'd better be ready to take the tough questions h-ead-on and not hem & haw with the answers. Evangelicals are already making excuses for her wimpy answer.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • Faith

      Hindus should not teach on Christianity; it's not their field.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:36 pm |
    • Rev. Rick

      @ Faith!! LOL!! There you go with that Hindu accusation again! LMAO ! I'm not Hindu, but I certainly have more respect for Hindu beliefs than I do yours....

      August 12, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • what

      hey rick,

      u worship the P**is god? and you call that more respectful...

      August 12, 2011 at 12:45 pm |
    • Faith

      Rick, your anti-Biblical inclusiveness is none other than Hindu... Read the Bible; Christianity is the utmost exclusive. Yes, real Hindus are much better than the Western hedonists.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • pfeffernusse

      Faith, just because someone knows more than you and doesn't agree with your interpretation of the Bible does not make them a Hindu. Hindu holy texts are the Vedas, the Upanishads, and the Puranas. Rev. Rick is not referencing any of those.

      August 13, 2011 at 10:53 am |
  13. Midwesterner from Iowa

    and the question itself??? what are we going back to the Dark Ages where women are submissive??
    Not in touch with reality!!!

    August 12, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
    • Faith

      The Western women are too strong for no good reason. Battling with Indians is over. Be submissive to man like a good woman. Don't let the less-confident white men marry Asian women because the Chinese men will need a lot of women because of the female-shortage.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • Faith

      The Western women are too strong for no good reason. Battling with Indians is over. Be submissive to man like a good woman. Don't let the less-con-fident white men marry Asian women because the Chinese men will need a lot of women because of the female-shortage in population.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
    • The Real Tom Paine

      @ Faith:

      Can't get a date, can you?

      August 12, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
  14. Me

    Hypocrisy, thy name is Michele, one L. I am submissive when it suits me?

    August 12, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • Faith

      Nah. There is a systematic principle.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:43 pm |
  15. Midwesterner from Iowa

    A very stupid question that has NOTHING to do with whether or not she is a good candidate!
    And not all Iowans are 'evangelicals'! The majority of Iowans support separation of church and state and see people like Bachmann as fanatics!

    August 12, 2011 at 12:31 pm |
    • Frogist

      @Midweasterner from Iowa: I don't think it is a stupid question at all. Bachmann believes in submission of women to men especially of husbands to wives based on her religion which we know from something she brought up. If she defers to someone else to make decisions for the country, it's absolutely something we need to know as voters.

      August 12, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  16. REG in AZ

    Bachmann is just a "performance". A supported "performance" now to get the nomination and what would be a dictated to (by those supporting) if ever elected. No help for other than the supporters there.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
  17. Don

    What a classy answer to a classless question. Typical.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:28 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Don

      For a lot of the Presidential GOP candidates, isn't their 'faith' part of what they not only talk about, but also use as 'reasons' that the conservative religious right should vote for them...?

      In other words, aren't they being vetted not only about their politics, but also about which flavor of evangelical they are...?

      So, with that said... seems to me IMHO, that the question posed was basically relevant within the scope of the GOP religious conservative debates.

      Especially... for someone like Michelle Bachmann who is 'continually' wearing her brand of evangelicalism on her sleeve.

      Regards,

      Peace...

      August 12, 2011 at 12:48 pm |
    • JJ in CT

      Far from classless. The question is actually quite relevant.

      Voters need to know who will be making the decisions if she were to be elected president. If indeed she is submissive to her husband as alluded to in the bible, then voters would technically be casting a ballot for her husband, He could be making the calls from the dugout.

      There are some religious sects that follow those parts of the bible. Some (not all) Lutheran women are not allowed to speak in church.

      The question is completely valid, and deserved a vaild answer, that was not provided.

      August 12, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  18. BJ

    In other words, her answer was no!

    August 12, 2011 at 12:27 pm |
  19. Pete

    The irony of this situation is astonishing. If the religion involved was Islam, Americans would be screaming about supressing women. But because it's Christianity, its ok? Having religion as part of your government makes you no different from Iran, Afghanistan, etc.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:25 pm |
  20. Martin T

    What MIchelle is saying is "the bible is the inerrant word of God, except when I say it isn't" And, isn't that so typical of the Christian response to these types of questions. Believe what the bible says, but only to the point that I interpret it. Use the words when they can be used to strike fear or make a point against someone, then interpret them when they don't agree with your current situation.

    I LOVED the question, actually, and I respected the answer from the standpoint of humanity, from the standpoint of an evangelical Christian answer, it sucked.

    August 12, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
    • Nonimus

      You forgot to mention, "... and when someone disagrees with you, just say that they don't understand the context of the Bible or they need to pray to God for a better understanding."

      August 12, 2011 at 12:23 pm |
    • Martin T

      You are so right, I did forget to mention that. You know God has a plan and we aren't smart enough to understand that plan and as sinners we shouldn't question said plan, etc....

      August 12, 2011 at 12:25 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Martin T & @Nonimus

      Well said.

      Peace...

      August 12, 2011 at 12:51 pm |
    • DamianKnight

      My wife and I have had several conversations regarding this verse. One, a lot of times, it is taken out of context by abusive men who want to dominate their wives. That is -not- the intention of the verse.

      Where we have come to is, the man is the head of the household. He is accountable to God for everything that transpires within his family. That does not mean he gets to lord over the household like a tyrant. He is required to make sure that the household operates in a Godly fashion, and therefore, his wife should submit to that. The passage, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" is the key to it. If we look at the comparison of Christ and the church, he loved it, he taught in it, and he gave everything, up to and including his life for it. That is what the passage means. Husbands: You're responsible for everything in your household and you are required to love your family, teach your family the right ways and give everything of yourself to your family, up to and including your life for it. It does not mean, that women should just give up every sense of individuality and wait on their husbands' desires hand and foot.

      August 12, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
    • Anti Christian Taliban Schizophrenics

      DamianKnight

      My wife and I have had several conversations regarding this verse. One, a lot of times, it is taken out of context by abusive men who want to dominate their wives. That is -not- the intention of the verse.

      Where we have come to is, the man is the head of the household. He is accountable to God for everything that transpires within his family. That does not mean he gets to lord over the household like a tyrant. He is required to make sure that the household operates in a Godly fashion, and therefore, his wife should submit to that. The passage, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" is the key to it. If we look at the comparison of Christ and the church, he loved it, he taught in it, and he gave everything, up to and including his life for it. That is what the passage means. Husbands: You're responsible for everything in your household and you are required to love your family, teach your family the right ways and give everything of yourself to your family, up to and including your life for it. It does not mean, that women should just give up every sense of individuality and wait on their husbands' desires hand and foot.
      ---
      Would her husband be submissive to her as his President?

      August 12, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • J.W

      Her husband would have to be submissive to her. She is higher authority as president. The Bible also says you should respect those in authority unless they are doing something morally wrong.

      August 12, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.