I expected conservatives to see more shame in it and to place a higher value on "purity" and chasteness, and to morr likely see a violation of this in borderline cases. But I may be way out on this, as I dont really have any experience with rape.
I expected conservatives to see more shame in it and to place a higher value on "purity" and chasteness, and to morr likely see a violation of this in borderline cases. But I may be way out on this, as I dont really have any experience with rape.
Killing can very often be justified.
Rape can NEVER be justified.
Killing can very often be justified.
Rape can NEVER be justified.
I disagree. Many years ago I came up with a scenario, admittedly a pretty wild case:
You're an undercover officer that has infiltrated some group of baddies. A part of the group went and did some dastardly deed--and took a hostage in their escape. She's seen their faces, they're going to kill her. You've called in the cavalry but they're not going to get there in time to save her. If you can delay her execution you can save her--but you need a good reason to do so.
Killing can very often be justified.
Rape can NEVER be justified.
I disagree. Many years ago I came up with a scenario, admittedly a pretty wild case:
You're an undercover officer that has infiltrated some group of baddies. A part of the group went and did some dastardly deed--and took a hostage in their escape. She's seen their faces, they're going to kill her. You've called in the cavalry but they're not going to get there in time to save her. If you can delay her execution you can save her--but you need a good reason to do so.
The OP asks us to consider murder. Murder is, by definition, unjustified killing.Killing can very often be justified.
Rape can NEVER be justified.
I disagree. Many years ago I came up with a scenario, admittedly a pretty wild case:
You're an undercover officer that has infiltrated some group of baddies. A part of the group went and did some dastardly deed--and took a hostage in their escape. She's seen their faces, they're going to kill her. You've called in the cavalry but they're not going to get there in time to save her. If you can delay her execution you can save her--but you need a good reason to do so.
Fantasies, no matter how entertaining (or creepy) they might be, are NOT evidence for anything.
You should probably try to remember this, it is very important.
Killing can very often be justified.
Rape can NEVER be justified.
I disagree. Many years ago I came up with a scenario, admittedly a pretty wild case:
You're an undercover officer that has infiltrated some group of baddies. A part of the group went and did some dastardly deed--and took a hostage in their escape. She's seen their faces, they're going to kill her. You've called in the cavalry but they're not going to get there in time to save her. If you can delay her execution you can save her--but you need a good reason to do so.
Ya, and what if a super villain is going to drop a nuclear bomb on the city unless you rape a woman? Are you just going to let everyone die?
Come on, people! There are legitimate scenarios where rape is justified.
Suppose you've been drafted into an ethnic-Serbian Bosnian militia. Your unit has been tasked with a spot of ethnic cleansing. You invade a village and take prisoners. Your sergeant orders you to rape one of them; the general wants all the Croatian women raped so they'll have Serb babies. You try to get out of it -- you tell your sergeant the priest says sex outside of marriage is a sin -- so he shrugs and shoots her. It seems to me the next time he orders you to rape a woman you should probably go ahead and do it. (Don't bother shooting the sergeant -- he could outdraw you in his sleep.)Fantasies, no matter how entertaining (or creepy) they might be, are NOT evidence for anything.
You should probably try to remember this, it is very important.
Suppose you've been drafted into an ethnic-Serbian Bosnian militia. Your unit has been tasked with a spot of ethnic cleansing. You invade a village and take prisoners. Your sergeant orders you to rape one of them; the general wants all the Croatian women raped so they'll have Serb babies. You try to get out of it -- you tell your sergeant the priest says sex outside of marriage is a sin -- so he shrugs and shoots her. It seems to me the next time he orders you to rape a woman you should probably go ahead and do it. (Don't bother shooting the sergeant -- he could outdraw you in his sleep.)Fantasies, no matter how entertaining (or creepy) they might be, are NOT evidence for anything.
You should probably try to remember this, it is very important.
Does it still count as a fantasy that's not evidence for anything if something like it has probably actually happened?
Suppose you've been drafted into an ethnic-Serbian Bosnian militia. Your unit has been tasked with a spot of ethnic cleansing. You invade a village and take prisoners. Your sergeant orders you to rape one of them; the general wants all the Croatian women raped so they'll have Serb babies. You try to get out of it -- you tell your sergeant the priest says sex outside of marriage is a sin -- so he shrugs and shoots her. It seems to me the next time he orders you to rape a woman you should probably go ahead and do it. (Don't bother shooting the sergeant -- he could outdraw you in his sleep.)Fantasies, no matter how entertaining (or creepy) they might be, are NOT evidence for anything.
You should probably try to remember this, it is very important.
Does it still count as a fantasy that's not evidence for anything if something like it has probably actually happened?
We'll call it Loren's Kobayashi Maru.Suppose you've been drafted into an ethnic-Serbian Bosnian militia. Your unit has been tasked with a spot of ethnic cleansing. You invade a village and take prisoners. Your sergeant orders you to rape one of them; the general wants all the Croatian women raped so they'll have Serb babies. You try to get out of it -- you tell your sergeant the priest says sex outside of marriage is a sin -- so he shrugs and shoots her. It seems to me the next time he orders you to rape a woman you should probably go ahead and do it. (Don't bother shooting the sergeant -- he could outdraw you in his sleep.)
Does it still count as a fantasy that's not evidence for anything if something like it has probably actually happened?
Good point, although I came up with the scenario before this atrocity came to light.
Suppose you've been drafted into an ethnic-Serbian Bosnian militia. Your unit has been tasked with a spot of ethnic cleansing. You invade a village and take prisoners. Your sergeant orders you to rape one of them; the general wants all the Croatian women raped so they'll have Serb babies. You try to get out of it -- you tell your sergeant the priest says sex outside of marriage is a sin -- so he shrugs and shoots her. It seems to me the next time he orders you to rape a woman you should probably go ahead and do it. (Don't bother shooting the sergeant -- he could outdraw you in his sleep.)Fantasies, no matter how entertaining (or creepy) they might be, are NOT evidence for anything.
You should probably try to remember this, it is very important.
Does it still count as a fantasy that's not evidence for anything if something like it has probably actually happened?
Sorry for offending your pedanticness. It means the same thing as "probably".Does it still count as a fantasy that's not evidence for anything if something like it has probably actually happened?
Yes.
In order to count as evidence for anything, it has to have actually happened.
'Probably actually' is just stupid.
So if somebody said moons can never form outside the solar system, and I offered the fact that gas giants in the solar system all have moons and lots of stars outside the solar system have gas giant planets as reason to think moons are probably widespread all over the universe, you'd call that an IOU for evidence? The scenario I presented is an assembly of elements all of which are depressingly common in human experience. If we don't have documented proof of that exact combination having occurred, that's easily accounted for by the same reason that we don't have documented proof of extra-solar moons: because there's an obvious obstacle standing in the way of acquiring whatever evidence about the matter exists.Oddly enough, the only thing that counts as evidence is, well, evidence.
An IOU for some evidence, probably, maybe, perhaps - nope, that's still not evidence.
Very likely; but that doesn't mean you don't have any more ethical judgments to make. Besides, you always shoot to miss. Your officers think you're a pretty sorry excuse for a soldier but they don't really care -- when you miss you're still effective at scaring the non-Serbs into running away, and the officers don't really care whether the villagers live or die as long as they do it somewhere else. You'd love to desert but you're pretty sure you'll suck at it, get caught, and be shot for it. So you just do the best you can to make the ethnic cleansing you don't know how to stop be as much less lethal as you can manage without causing yourself to be perceived as an enemy sympathizer. You're not up for any romantic heroics that will just mean you'll die for a hopeless cause. Yes, you're still going to get prosecuted for war crimes in the end; but what's your better course of action?But at this point, you have already helped slaughter at least two villages filled with innocent people. From a moral standpoint, you're the guy who helped slaughter at least two villages filled with innocent people. No matter what choices you end up making, you're always the bad guy in any sort of ethical dilemma.
You mean pedantry.Sorry for offending your pedanticness.Yes.
In order to count as evidence for anything, it has to have actually happened.
'Probably actually' is just stupid.
No, it doesn't. It is an attempt to claim more than is supported by the use of 'probably', while trying to keep the respectable truthfulness of 'probably'. It is weasely language, and calling you on it isn't pedantry.It means the same thing as "probably".
Nope. Your analogy is to a question of fact, not one of morality; and the rules of evidence are necessarily different.So if somebody said moons can never form outside the solar system, and I offered the fact that gas giants in the solar system all have moons and lots of stars outside the solar system have gas giant planets as reason to think moons are probably widespread all over the universe, you'd call that an IOU for evidence? The scenario I presented is an assembly of elements all of which are depressingly common in human experience. If we don't have documented proof of that exact combination having occurred, that's easily accounted for by the same reason that we don't have documented proof of extra-solar moons: because there's an obvious obstacle standing in the way of acquiring whatever evidence about the matter exists.Oddly enough, the only thing that counts as evidence is, well, evidence.
An IOU for some evidence, probably, maybe, perhaps - nope, that's still not evidence.
I mean you, Your Pedanticness.You mean pedantry.Sorry for offending your pedanticness.
Oh, I see, you called it stupid when you meant it was weaselly. That's okay then; I'm quite accustomed to people here looking down on my morals due to their poor analytical skills and/or the bugs in their own moral circuitry.No, it doesn't. It is an attempt to claim more than is supported by the use of 'probably', while trying to keep the respectable truthfulness of 'probably'. It is weasely language, and calling you on it isn't pedantry.It means the same thing as "probably".
That's stupid, a word which here might mean weaselly. Whether a man has ever raped a woman out of a well-founded fear that she'd be killed if he didn't is transparently a question of fact and not a question of morality.Nope. Your analogy is to a question of fact, not one of morality; and the rules of evidence are necessarily different.If we don't have documented proof of that exact combination having occurred, that's easily accounted for by the same reason that we don't have documented proof of extra-solar moons: because there's an obvious obstacle standing in the way of acquiring whatever evidence about the matter exists.
An unfair bias toward what? Toward believing that nearly all statements of the form "X can never be justified." are hasty generalizations by people who've underestimated the complexity of human morality? Whom will I be biased against or treat in an unfair manner due to my opinion that in mankind's whole sorry 200,000 year history of inter-ethnic warfare, the scenario I described has probably been played out, somewhere, at some time, by someone?If extra solar moons do not exist, then believing that they probably do does not have any impact on our attitudes towards other humans.
If the scenario you presented earlier is believed to have occurred, but actually does not, then this creates an unfair bias in the mind of the believer.