Religion and women.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If a “secular” law states that it is wrong to rape and murder, how is that law not derived from Gods Law?
IOW what makes that law any different?
It's not different, but it is a natural survival mechanism and God is not required.

Animals don't believe in God and don't go around raping and murdering each other.
How is that different from God's Law? It isn't derived from God's Law, is it? It's a good survival strategy.
You leave me be, I leave you be, unless I'm hungry.......o_O
 
Last edited:
Well, here is a list of wrong things in religions;

Cruelty and Violence in the Bible
  1. Genesis
    [*]Because God liked Abel's animal sacrifice more than Cain's vegetables, Cain kills his brother Abel in a fit of religious jealousy. 4:8
    [*]"I will destroy ... both man and beast."
    God is angry. He decides to destroy all humans, beasts, creeping things, fowls, and "all flesh wherein there is breath of life." He plans to drown them all. 6:7, 17
    [*]"Every living substance that I have made will I destroy."
    God repeats his intention to kill "every living substance ... from off the face of the earth." But why does God kill all the innocent animals? What had they done to deserve his wrath? It seems God never gets his fill of tormenting animals. 7:4
    [*]"All flesh died that moved upon the earth."
    God drowns everything that breathes air. From newborn babies to koala bears -- all creatures great and small, the Lord God drowned them all. 7:21-23
    [*]God sends a plague on the Pharaoh and his household because the Pharaoh believed Abram's lie. 12:17
    [*]God tells Abram to kill some animals for him. The needless slaughter makes God feel better. 15:9-10
    [*]Hagar conceives, making Sarai jealous. Abram tells Sarai to do to Hagar whatever she wants. "And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled." 16:6
    [*]"I will not destroy it for ten's sake."
    I guess God couldn't find even ten good Sodomites because he decides to kill them all in Genesis 19. Too bad Abraham didn't ask God about the children. Why not save them? If Abraham could find 10 good children, toddlers, infants, or babies, would God spare the city? Apparently not. God doesn't give a damn about children. 18:32
    [*]Lot refuses to give up his angels to the perverted mob, offering his two "virgin daughters" instead. He tells the bunch of angel rapers to "do unto them [his daughters] as is good in your eyes." This is the same man that is called "just" and "righteous" in 2 Peter 2:7-8. 19:7-8
    [*]God kills everyone (men, women, children, infants, newborns) in Sodom and Gomorrah by raining "fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven." Well, almost everyone -- he spares the "just and righteous" Lot and his family. 19:24
    [*]Lot's nameless wife looks back, and God turns her into a pillar of salt. 19:26
    [*]God gets angry with king Abimelech, though the king hasn't even touched Sarah. He says to the king, "Behold, thou art but a dead man," and threatens to kill him and all of his people. To compensate for the crime he never committed, Abimelech gives Abraham sheep, oxen, slaves, silver, and land. Finally, after Abraham "prayed unto God," God lifts his punishment to Abimelech, "for the Lord had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah." 20:3-18
    [*]Sarah, after giving birth to Isaac, gets angry again at Hagar (see 16:5-6) and tells Abraham to 'cast out this bondwoman and her son." God commands Abraham to "hearken unto her voice." So Abraham abandons Hagar and Ishmael, casting them out into the wilderness to die. 21:10-14
    [*]God orders Abraham to kill Isaac as a burnt offering. Abraham shows his love for God by his willingness to murder his son. But finally, just before Isaac's throat is slit, God provides a goat to kill instead. 22:2-13
    [*]Abraham shows his willingness to kill his son for God. Only an evil God would ask a father to do that; only a bad father would be willing to do it. 22:10
    [*]"Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son."
    Why did God love Abraham so much? Because he was willing to murder his son for him. (Greater evil hath no man than this, that he is willing to kill his own son for God.) 22:16
    [*]Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, is "defiled" by a man who seems to love her dearly. Her brothers trick all of the men of the town and kill them (after first having them all circumcised), and then take their wives and children captive. 34:1-31
    [*]"The terror of God was upon the cities that were round about them." 35:5
    [*]"And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him." What did Er do to elicit God's wrath? The Bible doesn't say. Maybe he picked up some sticks on Saturday. 38:7
    [*]After God killed Er, Judah tells Onan to "go in unto they brother's wife." But "Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and ... when he went in unto his brother's wife ... he spilled it on the ground.... And the thing which he did displeased the Lord; wherefore he slew him also." This lovely Bible story is seldom read in Sunday School, but it is the basis of many Christian doctrines, including the condemnation of both masturbation and birth control. 38:8-10
    [*]After Judah pays Tamar for her services, he is told that she "played the harlot" and "is with child by whoredom." When Judah hears this, he says, "Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." 38:24
    [*]Joseph interprets the baker's dream. He says that the pharaoh will cut off the baker's head, and hang his headless body on a tree for the birds to eat. 40:19
    [*]God brought a seven year, "very grievous" famine on the whole earth for no apparent reason (except maybe to make Joseph wealthy). 41:25-32, 54
    2 Exodus........more
https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
 
Why do you think people commit adultery?
For consensual sex with someone other than their spouse.
The definition pretty much explains it well enough.
Nothing about rape in there.
While rape and adultery both have the act of sexual intercourse as their fundamental, adultery is simply NOT the (or even a) fundamental basis of rape.
That would be like saying a boxing match is the fundamental basis of being physically assualted: one is with the consent of both parties, the other is not, but both have fighting (at least by one party) as a fundamental.
So your comment was, and remains, grossly incorrect.
If you accept and abide by the real principle of marriage, no. There is no chance of rape.
And you have given "a man must love his wife more than his own body" as the real principle, right?
So for those men who don't love their own body too much, does that mean they can treat their wife only marginally better?
If a man likes to be pushed around, humiliated, degraded, does that mean they can do that to their wife without their wife's consent, even he loves her?
Or are you simply saying the circular argument that if you follow rules then you won't break rules?

And what of a woman raping a man?
Does your "real principle" of marriage include a woman needing to love her husband more than her own body?
 
For consensual sex with someone other than their spouse.
Ok
Nothing about rape in there.
While rape and adultery both have the act of sexual intercourse as their fundamental, adultery is simply NOT the (or even a) fundamental basis of rape.
If the husband and wife are committed to each other in their relationship, it begs the question as to why they have to have sex outside of their marriage. Also why is sex so important that it compels them to commit adultery?
That would be like saying a boxing match is the fundamental basis of being physically assualted:
You’ll find that most boxers, especially the good ones are violent people, and do commit assault, outside of boxing matches.
So your comment was, and remains, grossly incorrect.
It may appear so on the surface.
And you have given "a man must love his wife more than his own body" as the real principle, right?
Yes
So for those men who don't love their own body too much, does that mean they can treat their wife only marginally better?
If a man does not love his own body, what is the point of getting married, and having children?
If a man likes to be pushed around, humiliated, degraded, does that mean they can do that to their wife without their wife's consent, even he loves her?
He may do?
Such a man is consumed by his delusion. His marriage is most probably a sham. He should grow up and take responsibility instead of acting the fool.
And what of a woman raping a man?
I’ve always found that weird.
How does a women rape a man?
 
If the husband and wife are committed to each other in their relationship, it begs the question as to why they have to have sex outside of their marriage. Also why is sex so important that it compels them to commit adultery?
Because some people are arseholes?

And for others, it could also be with the consent of their spouse - ie - open marriage.

He may do?
No. He may not do.

A man who violates his wife by forcing or pushing her to have sex with him or has sex with her without her consent, is by every definition, a rapist.

Love doesn't come into it. If a man loved his wife, he would respect her as an equal and would not rape her.

Such a man is consumed by his delusion. His marriage is most probably a sham. He should grow up and take responsibility instead of acting the fool.
Or he's simply a rapist who seeks to control women.

I’ve always found that weird.
How does a women rape a man?
By having sex with them without their consent.

I would suggest you look up 'sex education' if you are still confused as to how this can happen.
 
Atheists talking about God, and scripture.
That is funny
About as some theists talking about rape:

Did God command Moses “rape” the virgins?
Or was that bilvons spin?

We understand rape to mean “a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent”.
I’ll assume you agree.
Can you point out anywhere where Moses is commanded to “rape” virgins?
There is however references to the fundamental basis of rape, and that is “adultery”, which is an abomination to God.
If you marry, and follow the rules , like the passages I showed from a while back, then there is no chance of the kind of rape we understand today, occurring.
You can’t have your cake, and eat it.

Is capitol punishment murder?
Some may argue that it is, and some will say it isn’t.
One argument for why it could at least be murder, is that they may kill the wrong person, or an innocent person. Fair enough. But if the government killed a person who is actually a murderer. What then?

God cannot be wrong.
God knows everything.
You may not believe in God, but those are His attributes. If you don’t take them into account when you read the Bible, that is your problem.

Rape and murder is rampant today, because people are in darkness, due to anger (a negative emotion) because they don’t believe in God.
If they believed in God, they would follow His commandments.
You want to talk about rape and murder. Look at the despicable acts of the last century, carried out by communist atheists. Stalin alone has killed more that all casualties of religious wars combined.
Shall I label you as a Stalinist, because he didn’t believe in God either.

Seriously dude, what the hell were you actually thinking?

Adultery is between two consenting adults.

Rape is clearly not.

If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

If she is made to marry him, he is still her rapist.
 
I like that he recognises we are not our bodies.
That is the beginning of spiritual understanding, and should be the first thing taught in religion.
Ten word response....
And not a single one of those Ten words would seem to indicate that you read or even lightly glanced over the Quote.

Again, you Posted the following :
Why not just discuss?
What’s the point of playing mind games?
This place is becoming totalitarian.
It reminds me of 1984.
People don’t have any integrity, or individuality anymore. Doesn’t the truth matter?
 
Atheists talking about God, and scripture.
That is funny
There are some religions that kill atheists because they do not talk about God and scripture, i.e apostasy.
That isn't funny.

Question; if in scripture a woman must obey and submit to a man against her will is it rape? Does she have a will?
 
I see your point, because we see celebrities who have women clamouring to have sex with them, yet some will still rape.
Men who rape their own children, even while they are babies, what to speak of other people’s children. Men who rape their mothers.
I don’t get it.
But if there is something to stop them, it has to be more than the threat of punishment.
It has to come from them-self.
Marriage itself is not a cure, but to respect the real purpose of marriage may hold back the urge to rape, long enough to become embarrassed. This could bring about remorse and guilt, and restoration of conscience.
Unfortunately, marriage won’t cure a rapist because many men who have been arrested for rape, were married. Most rapists hate women which is what drives them to their crimes. Misogyny is a powerful force and can often result in violence. Important to note, not all rapists are violent. If a man puts a date rape drug in a woman’s drink, her lack of ability to consent due to her level of consciousness is why it’s considered rape. That’s just one example. If a woman doesn’t want to have sex with her husband for any reason at all, he doesn’t have the “right” to force himself on her. You might feel she is “withholding” sex from him but if he forces himself on her, that would still be rape. Even if no violence is involved.

Many Christians use the Bible to support that sex should be an on demand experience, but I think that is distorting Scripture. Couples should discuss why their sex life is weak or non-existent and find ways to work towards improving it. Rape is never a solution. Remember, Jesus told men to love their wives the way He loved the church.

I’m wondering if you’re getting the marriage bit from Paul (Bible) recommending that if men can’t control their lust, they should marry?
 
Last edited:
I’m wondering if you’re getting the marriage bit from Paul (Bible) recommending that if men can’t control their lust, they should marry?
No, according Islam, if men can't control their lust, women should cover themselves so as not tempt men. If they show as much as an ankle, they can be whipped.
How's that for laying blame at the doorstep of the innocent party.
 
No, according Islam, if men can't control their lust, women should cover themselves so as not tempt men. If they show as much as an ankle, they can be whipped.
How's that for laying blame at the doorstep of the innocent party.
Agree. I don’t think Jan is using Islam as the basis of his opinions, though.
 
@DMOE..

.. how is it possible for YOU to programme every facet, and every department of YOUR mind, if YOU are YOUR mind?
 
Because some people are arseholes?
Really?
And for others, it could also be with the consent of their spouse - ie - open marriage.
Okay.
A man who violates his wife by forcing or pushing her to have sex with him or has sex with her without her consent, is by every definition, a rapist.
Sex wasn’t a part of the equation in Baldeees question. Did you not read it?
Love doesn't come into it. If a man loved his wife, he would respect her as an equal and would not rape her.
Did you not read my response?
Or he's simply a rapist who seeks to control women.
You seem to be having comprehension issues.
I wasn’t responding to the notion of a person raping his wife, in that particular segment of the discussion.
By having sex with them without their consent.
So does she lace his food with viagara to get his s penis hard?
Because I’m wondering how she gets her kicks on a soft one.
Do you think he gets erect because he is repulsed by the idea of a woman forcing herself on him?
Or because she has a gun to his head, or a knife to his throat?
 
About as some theists talking about rape:
How so?
An atheists is simply a person who is without a belief in God/gods.
What does that have to do with talking about rape!
Adultery is between two consenting adults.
Why do those folks have to be adulterous in first place?
If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
There is nothing in that verse that suggests rape. But let’s break it down before the snowflakes start foaming at the mouth.

virgin not betrothed/ young woman who has not KNOWN a man

lies with her and they are found / getting they freak- on, oversleep and get caught.

then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her / Oops should have kept his penis in his pants.
Now according to that culture, he has to pay a dowry, and marry her, because nobody will want her as she has been soiled. Nobody wants her because their progeny will be messed up. Now he has to marry her without any prospect of divorce.

See, nothing to do with rape.
The rape thing has already been covered in the two verses wegs posted.

I forgot. You’re most probably going to use the word “seized” to back up the idea rape. So let’s look at that word and see what it could possibly mean to help your case.

seize - take hold of suddenly and forcibly.
take (an opportunity) eagerly and decisively.

I’m betting you’re going to seize the word “forcibly” to back your claim. So let’s take a look.

forcibly - using force or violence.
in a forceful way; convincingly.

So you have one shot at this, and that he used violence in order to have sex with her, which if true, is rape.

So let us turn our attention to the context of the verse you posted, versus a verse that actually talk about rape. Namely this one...

But if a man find a betrothed [married]damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: in a forceful way; convincingly then the man only that lay with her shall die:

This verse states that is f it is known that the man raped her, he shall die.
In the verse you quoted it stated the the man shall have to marry the girl, not die.

You have absolutely no grounds to say the verse you quoted is an acceptance of rape.
 
Last edited:
Please re-read the quote...you seem to have missed the pertinent word "own".
Yes your own mind.
If it is YOUR mind, then it belongs to YOU.
If it belongs to YOU, then it begs the question what are YOU.
My all-caps is not shouting, it is emphasising the difference.
The only thing more profound than that are the questions - What am I, and What is my source.
So you are quite out of order with your analysis of my response, especially as your response to one of the greatest poems that describe what it is to be a real man, was a measely 6 words, which said nothing about the poem, compared to my 10 words, which summed up the whole point and purpose of religion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top