![[PukiWiki]](image/pukiwiki.png "[PukiWiki]")
https://bit.ly/3QIZJyO https://bit.ly/3S0HR3G https://bit.ly/3B8wpw1 https://bit.ly/3ByMuwq https://bit.ly/3BApIEg https://bit.ly/3QCDkTF https://bit.ly/3QCtGR5 https://bit.ly/3BbQHor
by Jayda on 2004 Sep 16 - 05:13 | reply to this comment Well said, and thank you! Thank you for providing and maintaining this site, well said for that article.
Now all you need do is get it printed on a rounders bat for the especially thick-skulled out there... ;-)
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" Hamlet, somewhere.
by ConfusedOfHomeCounties on 2004 Sep 17 - 00:08 | reply to this comment Why not religion? Dear Sarah,
I am having some difficulty in understanding why you have included religion in your list of what taken in hand is not about. Perhaps you could clarify your reason(s). Although I understand that the discussion of religion can descend into an endless argument about interpretations of scripture, I do not think it is right to include it in your list of what taken in hand is not about.
I have never argued that the Bible supports a husband's right to spank his wife (neither does it forbid it). However, it does explain and support a husband's authority in marriage. Is that not a subject worthy of consideration for those of us who live in a taken in hand relationship? Much of what we practice and understand about marriage in the western tradition has its origins in Christianity and the Bible. If understood correctly, there are some passages which beautifully describe the union of a man and a woman. I can not be the only one who participates in the discussions on Taken In Hand who's taken in hand relationship has a basis in their faith.
Having said this, I have learned from past experience how controversial and divisive this subject can be. Nevertheless, just as you yourself have discussed works of great literature, the Taming of the Shrew for example, I think it is wrong to suggest religious themes as being antithetical to a taken in hand relationship. If it is OK to reference Shakespeare, Freud, Ayn Rand, and many other worthy sources, why not religious sources?
