The bible is not against Womens rights:

Opening NotesPro did not present a disclaimer against the NT before the debate; therefore the claims made in the New Testament qualify as being part of the Bible [1]. I will reiterate how the Bible inhibits women's rights throughout the Old and New testaments alike. In order to negate the resolution, I must only prove the Bible is against women's rights (on account of being female) in ONE instance. Therefore I will focus on the most blatant or important examples.The Right to Self-OwnershipPro claims that laws against coveting thy neighbor's wife are merely laws against jealousy. However the text specifies nixing jealousy regarding anything that "belongs" to thy neighbor, implying that wives belong to their husbands. This idea of a man’s wife being his property is confirmed by other teachings of the Bible:"A man paid a bride price to a woman’s father for her hand in marriage – the father did not have to consider his daughter’s wishes in the man he chose for her.A man paid the bride price to a woman’s father if he had pre-marital sex with her, and the father still had the choice of whether he would give his daughter to this man in marriage. Pre-marital sex was considered a *property crime* against the father of the virgin that had been defiled.When a man committed adultery with another man’s wife, he and she could be executed. This was considered a *property crime* against the woman’s husband. However if a married man had sex with a prostitute, this was NOT considered adultery, but rather the sin of Whoremongering as no *property crime* was committed" [2].Pro claims I have misinterpreted Exodus 21:7. He states that since men could also be slaves, women did not have less rights than men. That is patently false. While all slaves would be considered human property, women were considered property even when they were not slaves. In Exodus 21:9-11, the Bible states a female slave sold as a wife must be given the full rights of a daughter and a wife, even though she remained human property.Property is bought and sold, and we can see women being sold into marriage (regardless of their will) throughout the Bible:* Genesis 12:14-16* Genesis 24:51-53* Genesis 29:18-30* Deuteronomy 22:28-29* Exodus 21:7, etc. because again women were sold into marriage; men were NOT sold into marriage. Pro falsely claims that God condemned Solomon for having many wives, when in fact God condemned Solomon for following other gods - not for having many wives. In fact, God says (speaking through the prophet Nathan) in 2 Samuel 12:8 that if David’s wives and concubines were not enough, He would have given David even more. And David and Solomon were not the only ones with multiple wives throughout the Old Testament: Abraham and Jacob did also [3]. Lamech married two women in Genesis 4:19. Finally on this point, Pro has not proven in any way whatsoever that there is a "mistranslation" of Numbers 30. The Right to Bodily Autonomy Pro states that a mistranslation of Numbers 31:17-18 suggests the Bible ISN'T against stoning non-virgins, but that simply isn't supported and he has not proven as such. Virginity was highly valued (particularly for women) at the time. Pro says, "The reason why it says to kill all the women who aren’t virgins, is because if they aren’t virgins, it means they were involved in this evil [Pagan] ritual." But that does not reveal the true nature/symbolism of a woman's virginity. "In the culture of the time [her] sexual purity was representative of the father's ability to raise her according to the laws of God... A man's reputation... could be adversely affected by the fornication of his daughter... there was every expectation from the bridegroom that she would be a virgin. If the contrary was discovered... this would bring great shame to the family and the community... to insure the integrity of the family and to remove the evil of adulterous/fornication from the community, stoning was advocated" [4].Pro says Deuteronomy 22:20-21 states, "Women who have sex outside of marriage should be stoned, the same punishment is set for a man who has sex outside of marriage." But according to the Bible, men were permitted many wives and mistresses. It seems the only way a man could be an adulterer was if he had sexual thoughts or relations with MARRIED women (i.e. another man's property). But a women was an adulteress if she had relations with any man that was not her husband. A husband was forced to divorce an adulterous wife, but an adulterous man could remain married to his wife with impunity. Note the Rabbis of the Talmud said that four wives was the realistic maximum for a man, so that he could devote the proper amount of time for sexual relations with each of them [5]. Pro then tries to discredit some of the verses I mentioned. For instance he said Numbers 20:10-14 doesn’t condone raping women; it’s mundane. Indeed it is and I did not list that as a verse highlighting rape. This is the Numbers verse I mentioned, and readers can judge for themselves if it condones murder, rape or another violation of bodily autonomy: And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man (Numbers 31:17-18). Pro claims Deuteronomy 22:28-29 and Deuteronomy 22:23-24 refer to voluntary sex (mutual adultery), thus men and women were both stoned to death. I'll post the quotes: If, however the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death... And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire. Pro ignored Judges 19:24-25 which blatantly advocates rape: "Look, here is my virgin daughter and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.” But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.This verse (Samuel 12:11-12) doesn't advocate rape, but it clearly proposes women as property i.e. without bodily and sexual autonomy: “Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”Zechariah 14:2: For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity...Deuteronomy 20:14: As for the women, the children, the livestockand everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. Women as Servants Pro must defend the New Testament. Extend my arguments regarding Corinthians 11:2-10, Timothy 2:11-12, Colossians 3:18, Ephesians 5:22-24, Corinthians 14:34-36, Corinthians 1:11-3, Titus 2:4-5 and Peter 3:1. For Genesis 3:16, Pro says "This verse doesn’t say that women should be submissive to men, it only says that they will." In other words, he says the Bible doesn't say that women SHOULD be inferior to men; women simply ARE inferior to men and the Bible is merely pointing that out. Right. The Bible teaches that women must submit to the authority of men. When a husband uses the power God has given him, he supposedly blesses his entire family through his leadership according to Peter 3:1-6. But this type of authority would not be possible if women had EQUAL rights; indeed the Bible calls for the man to lead (regardless of circumstance) implying that men are automatically the superior sex/leaders. Women as More Dirty or Sinful Pro claims women were not considered dirty or unclean in Leviticus 12:1-8. I mentioned that female babies were considered automatically more dirty or detrimental. Here's what it says: "If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days... And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks."Extend my argument that the Bible notes women are allegedly being punished on behalf of Eve's win, which many Biblical scholars confirm: "In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children — With more pain than any other creatures undergo in bringing forth their young: a lasting and terrible proof this that human nature is in a fallen state... Thy desires shall be referred or submitted to thy husband’s will and pleasure... Thou shalt now be brought to a lower degree; and whereas thou wast made thy husband’s equal, thou shalt henceforward be his inferior, and he shall rule over thee — As thy lord and governor" [6]. Furthermore, extend my argument that sex in itself for women is described as shameful and dirty. This can be seen in Revelation 14:3-4, Galatians and Ephesians among other verses. ConclusionPro claims that because some women in the OT had authority, and because the Bible does command respect for women in some regards, that this somehow means women in the Bible had (equal) rights. First, I have demonstrated that the NT ought to be considered in this discussion, so Pro must address those claims. Second, I've proven that women were considered inferior and lacked basic rights thrughout the entire Bible. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org...[2] https://biblicalgenderroles.com...[3] http://www.gotquestions.org...[4] https://carm.org...[5] http://www.libchrist.com...[6] http://biblehub.com...