Ya, they were kind of inbetween a rock and hard place there. It's too bad there wasn't anybody who could give divine commands like "Don't look down on marriage to rape victims" or something like that. Maybe put it into some type of book.
-
Features
The Bible is holy and from god. Oh, and also you have to understand the times in which it was written. WUT?
- Thread starter Rhea
- Start date
Ya, they were kind of inbetween a rock and hard place there. It's too bad there wasn't anybody who could give divine commands like "Don't look down on marriage to rape victims" or something like that. Maybe put it into some type of book.
Lion IRC
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,138
- Basic Beliefs
- Biblical theist
I said...the Israelite biblical punishment of male sex crimes against women was much harsher than neighboring societies. Considered from a secular point of view, a Hebrew woman was much safer than her counterparts in other patriarchal male-dominated societies.
God takes marriage seriously.
What does post-modern, secular, feminist society do?
It liberates men! It gave men guilt-free sex. Men can walk away from marriage anytime they want. Men can coerce women into having an abortion.
God takes marriage seriously.
What does post-modern, secular, feminist society do?
It liberates men! It gave men guilt-free sex. Men can walk away from marriage anytime they want. Men can coerce women into having an abortion.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
Meh.. Sources? I think this is bullshit. I think there was no difference, right across the ancient world. Keep in mind that sexual moralities in the ancient world were often hypocritical. These rules only applied to poor people. In 500 AD came the first papal bull to close all those brothels attached to each Christian church, used to pay for upkeep of the churches.
What's the problem with guilt-free sex? If it's consensual sex, then what's the problem? You're such a string of bizarre statements.
Also.. this is a deflection away from your idea that rape can be justified if they get married.
So can women. The good thing about this system is that it forces both parties in the relationship to treat each other with respect. Or they'll lose the other. It's a great practical lesson of life. Forcing people to stay together is not healthy. Not for the people in it, nor society, nor their children.
I'm a big believer in letting people take responsibility for their actions.
Again.... sources? I think you made this up
Sarpedon
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- MN, US
- Basic Beliefs
- the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
Or, maybe since its god, he could say "Hey, don't blame the woman for being raped."
God is not a slave to human conventions. God could literally command them to do anything he wanted, and they would have had to obey.
He ordered raped women to be forced to marry their rapists.
Or this was made up by people who weren't interested in being just or kind.
God is not a slave to human conventions. God could literally command them to do anything he wanted, and they would have had to obey.
He ordered raped women to be forced to marry their rapists.
Or this was made up by people who weren't interested in being just or kind.
And why not have rape be the leading cause of penis cancer? It seems that if God wanted to be against rape, he could have made it an easily solvable problem with little to no effort whatsoever.
You didn't read anything I wrote, did you.
Taht wasn't the point of my post. The point of the question was, what could your god do about it?
It could have written a bible that instructs people NOT to harm the women.
And, as I said, pay for her upkeep without her having to get raped again and again.
For the love of reason, you seem to be declaring that a woman is better off getting raped every day than not getting married.
WTF?
And the ability to continue raping her every night for the rest of her life, right? Oh, the terrible punishment.
To her.
I think you've taken that out of context. Because if that was true, why should he be forced to marry her if he's supposed to die.
You seem to have that kind of mixed up.
Only if you think there's nothing wrong with the rape going on and on for the rest of her life.
Wow.
That's pretty barbaric of you. Just ~oh well! Rape today, rape tomorrow, rape every day! She won't mind! It's better than being shunned, amirite?
That's depraved.
And if you had a god, he could have fixed it by telling people:
1. don't rape.
2. If you rape, you have to pay her upkeep the rest of her life and you can't go near her ever again.
3. If someone is raped, they are not to be shunned, they are to be welcomed and pampered and loved
4. and protected from ever getting raped again.
But you don't have a god
not with any power or skills anyway,
So you don't have that.
Secular society does a better job of that.
braces_for_impact
Veteran Member
What does it feel like to continuously have to make excuse after excuse to desperately cling to this fiction? Does it ever get to you? Do you ever ask yourself how you ended up slinging increasingly bazaar and incoherent concepts just to hold onto what you want so desperately to be true? When you are constantly trying to handwave and explain things away, are you ever overwhelmed just by sheer number of square pegs you try to fit into round holes after a while? Does it ever build up to a point where you stop and ask yourself questions like this?
Behold the power of faith.
I used to watch "Atheist Experience" in my younger atheist days, not so much anymore, but there are times where this forum reminds me very much of a caller that is going to be the 3,467th Christian to FINALLY explain things right, only to end up looking foolish and spouting forth the most incredible set of error-ridden conspiracies and suppositions to ever hit the airwaves. One of those episodes where even other Christians are facepalming and everyone knows the caller is in WAY over their head, except, of course, the caller and their righteous indignation.
So you are saying that women who were raped should be considered fortunate, because they had just won the lottery and snared a husband who had to support them for life. An economic windfall not to be taken lightly.
This is so fucked up that there is nothing I could say that would emphasize the absurdity of your position. Do you even think before you post shit like this?
God couldn't have sent her a cart full of gold so she could live her life independently and with dignity? God couldn't have stepped in and stopped the rape from happening? Why does Biblegod support the free will of the rapist but not the victim?
Its also really weird that God made the time to ban wearing mixed fabrics and eating shellfish, but he couldn't add a commandment saying "you shall not rape a woman"? Or if a woman is raped, this should not be held against her as a mark of shame? Talk about fucked up priorities.
How about decreeing that a rapist would have his genitalia cut off so he couldn't do it again? Instead, Biblegod made sure that the rape victim would be forced to marry her rapist so he could continue to rape her for the rest of her life.
You really don't see any of this being fucked up?
Source?
Which would explain why he condemns a rape victim to spending the rest of her life with her rapist. Yup, god is serious about marriage.
What's wrong with guilt free sex? And women have the same access to guilt-free sex that men do. In fact, it is probably easier for a woman to get guilt-free sex than a man in many societies. Men will usually have sex with anyone with a vagina, while women tend to be more discerning.
So can women. At least in most western countries they can. Shithole countries ruled by religious dictators, probably not so much. So what does that tell you about religion?
Possibly. But much less likely in western countries that are not subject to the tyranny of religious laws, and women are treated as equal under the law. Having an abortion should be the woman's decision. Its her body, and she should be responsible for the decision.
And therein lies the sickness of Christianity. He sees the "guilt-free sex" enabled by the modern world - birth control, no stonings, no shame as BAD, while he sees a woman condemned to be raped for the rest of her life within the bounds of marriage as GOOD.
Is there anything at all more barbaric in the world?
No, there isn't. Religion turns many good human beings with enormous potential to change the world for the better into barbarians who care only to impose their Bronze Age ideology on the rest of humanity. LIRC frequently rants about how abortions kill unborn fetuses, but in the same breath defends Biblegod's alleged extermination of all human life on the planet because they were not behaving. How broken does someone's mind have to be to defend genocide?
I keep thinking about this deeply horrific doctrine that Lion embraces and I can’t get it out of my head.
That somehow he believes his church and his god teaches him that being raped every day of your life is better than poverty. And that moreover, his god was so weak that he couldn’t overcome frat-boy peer pressure of the day, so he gives them a “punishment” that gives the man exactly what he wants while torturing a woman for life, because the god doesn’t think he can convince the men (through any possible means available to a god) to just be kind to the rape victim and not treat her like she is “damaged”?
That is unimaginably horrific.
And let’s look at a contemporary example: Elizabeth Smart. Whose kidnapping and rape for NINE MONTHS was brought on by religious delusions. Her rapist spouted this very doctrine to her about why her virginity was the reason he had kidnapped her. He said exactly what Lion says.
But unlike Lion’s religion, our secular “guilt-free-sex society” embraced her upon her return and punished him. She is loved, she is admired for her tenacity, she is understood for her actions in surviving, and she is welcomed back to our secular society.
Lion’s religion abhors that outcome. Lion’s god is incapable of engineering that outcome. Lion thinks she was better off remaining a sex slave than living in a “guilt-free-sex society”.
This is the outcome of virgin-worship, of those despicable “abstinence talks” that tell teenagers that a girl who has had sex is like used gum, of those “promise ring” ceremonies. All of which develop and instill and indoctrinate the message that sex MUST include guilt and that if a woman has sex she is no good to anyone but the man who first had sex with her.. This is the bronze age frat-boy intellect that he and his church and many other churches are STILL pushing (and his god is still not able to overcome). That if you get raped, you are damaged. Your only worth is in your ability to be a virgin for a man. Anything else is wrong and an evil by-product of secular “guilt-free-sex” which must be defamed at every possible opportunity. Because sex for women MUST come with the guilt of Adam and Eve who were ashamed of their nakedness.
I keep thinking about this. That there are thousands, millions, of people walking around in society who care so little for women, who understand violence and victimization so little that this seems admirable to them. I can’t wrap my head around that kind of evil.
That somehow he believes his church and his god teaches him that being raped every day of your life is better than poverty. And that moreover, his god was so weak that he couldn’t overcome frat-boy peer pressure of the day, so he gives them a “punishment” that gives the man exactly what he wants while torturing a woman for life, because the god doesn’t think he can convince the men (through any possible means available to a god) to just be kind to the rape victim and not treat her like she is “damaged”?
That is unimaginably horrific.
And let’s look at a contemporary example: Elizabeth Smart. Whose kidnapping and rape for NINE MONTHS was brought on by religious delusions. Her rapist spouted this very doctrine to her about why her virginity was the reason he had kidnapped her. He said exactly what Lion says.
But unlike Lion’s religion, our secular “guilt-free-sex society” embraced her upon her return and punished him. She is loved, she is admired for her tenacity, she is understood for her actions in surviving, and she is welcomed back to our secular society.
Lion’s religion abhors that outcome. Lion’s god is incapable of engineering that outcome. Lion thinks she was better off remaining a sex slave than living in a “guilt-free-sex society”.
This is the outcome of virgin-worship, of those despicable “abstinence talks” that tell teenagers that a girl who has had sex is like used gum, of those “promise ring” ceremonies. All of which develop and instill and indoctrinate the message that sex MUST include guilt and that if a woman has sex she is no good to anyone but the man who first had sex with her.. This is the bronze age frat-boy intellect that he and his church and many other churches are STILL pushing (and his god is still not able to overcome). That if you get raped, you are damaged. Your only worth is in your ability to be a virgin for a man. Anything else is wrong and an evil by-product of secular “guilt-free-sex” which must be defamed at every possible opportunity. Because sex for women MUST come with the guilt of Adam and Eve who were ashamed of their nakedness.
I keep thinking about this. That there are thousands, millions, of people walking around in society who care so little for women, who understand violence and victimization so little that this seems admirable to them. I can’t wrap my head around that kind of evil.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lion IRC
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,138
- Basic Beliefs
- Biblical theist
Where Rhea is wrong about Deuteronomy 22:28-29
1. This law acted favourably as a social welfare support for the woman.
2. This law does not stipulate the act of rape. The hermeneutics clearly show it applying primarily to consentual albeit illegal sexual activity between a man and an unbetrothed woman - a woman who would otherwise subsequently become completely ostracised (unmarriagable), and she was therefore afforded the equivalent of compulsory alimony.
3. This law did not force the woman to marry her putative seducer (the presumption being that women never initiated casual fornication) Rather, it forced the man to unwillingly marry the woman he took advantage of, thereby preventing him from doing a runner after he'd had his way. It was a shotgun wedding so to speak.
1. This law acted favourably as a social welfare support for the woman.
2. This law does not stipulate the act of rape. The hermeneutics clearly show it applying primarily to consentual albeit illegal sexual activity between a man and an unbetrothed woman - a woman who would otherwise subsequently become completely ostracised (unmarriagable), and she was therefore afforded the equivalent of compulsory alimony.
3. This law did not force the woman to marry her putative seducer (the presumption being that women never initiated casual fornication) Rather, it forced the man to unwillingly marry the woman he took advantage of, thereby preventing him from doing a runner after he'd had his way. It was a shotgun wedding so to speak.
Jobar
Zen Hedonist
In the 'time' of that Deuteronomy verse, a woman who had been raped was considered soiled goods; often her only option was to become a prostitute, if she wasn't killed by males of her own family. (Much the same is true in many Islamic societies today.) So, it may actually have been better for her to be forced to marry the man who raped her.
Which shows how utterly fucked up such societies are, and were.
Which shows how utterly fucked up such societies are, and were.
ideologyhunter
Contributor
Because very few believers read their own scriptures, for one thing. They take the word of their pastor that it (the Bible) is the one true road map for, etc., etc.
There are a few holes in your argument.
1. Social welfare support payments do not typically require a woman receiving the welfare to be sold into sexual slavery to a man who has raped her. Sexual slavery is exactly what Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is talking about; the owner of the woman, her father, is compensated for the loss of value of his property as a result of the rape (50 units of currency), and sells his tarnished property, his now worthless daughter, to the rapist so he can continue to rape her for the rest of her life. God doesn't want a good vagina and womb to go to waste, he is kind of practical like that. You see, the Bible makes it clear in this verse and elsewhere, that women are the property of men, first their fathers, and later their husbands, to be bought, sold or traded at their whim. Which is why the payment goes to the father, not the woman who was raped.
2. The law explicitly stipulates the act of rape. "and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, seems pretty clear to me. Maybe you have a different definition of the word rape, as you do with other troublesome words like omniscient. Also note that the woman's word is not good enough to satisfy the burden of proof; the rapist has to be caught by a third party in the act of raping the woman for the law to be applied.
3. How generous and practical of god to stipulate that the man (rapist) should feed and clothe and generally keep up the maintenance on his newly acquired property. Good economic advice, since the woman will be expected to produce many offspring to "help out with family chores", and if female, to be sold off to the highest bidder as a "wife" when she comes of age.
Setting your repulsive euphemisms, hand-waving and outright falsehoods aside, try to place yourself in the shoes of the woman and try to think like a normal human being, with empathy and compassion. If you were a woman and you were raped, how would you feel about being sold to your rapist for the rest of your life? Can you take off your god-glasses for a little bit and think about this question seriously? I know, it is terrifying to even think about questioning your god's word, but be brave and try anyway. Who knows, you might find some of that grit that has been absent from your life for so long.
Yah, bullshit.
actual and not cherry-picked deuterono-evil-my said:
The woman gets nothing. The money goes to her dad, who profits off her rape. Pimp?
And if he rapes and she was pledged to belong to another man, why, that’s bad. But if a man doesn’t own her, the rapist gets to. For the low-low price of 50 shekels.
Hey, Lion - isn't this story awesome? God would love it, he totally would. For her own good, of course. It was done as a routine measure when she filed for state aid. Get that dad to help out, amirite? According to your bible's logic! Woot!
https://nypost.com/2017/10/09/convicted-rapist-gets-joint-custody-of-victims-child/
A convicted sex offender who raped a Michigan woman when she was only 12 years old has now been granted joint custody of his victim’s 8-year-old son, according to a report.
https://nypost.com/2017/10/09/convicted-rapist-gets-joint-custody-of-victims-child/
A convicted sex offender who raped a Michigan woman when she was only 12 years old has now been granted joint custody of his victim’s 8-year-old son, according to a report.
Lion IRC
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,138
- Basic Beliefs
- Biblical theist