If you don't scream during a rape you are consenting to it

[bboyneko]

According to the Bible's (and presumably, God's) infinite wisdom, in Deuteronomy 22:23-27 (http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=Deuteronomy+22%3A23-27&NIV_version=yes&language=english&x=14&y=9) a woman who does not scream for help during a Rape has committed fornication and somehow consented /enjoyed the rape and should be executed.

I don't know how many other modern Christian or Judaic faiths still hold this to be true, at least the part about not screaming = enjoying.

The Jehovah's Witnesses apparantly still hold this true (http://quotes.jehovahswitnesses.com/rape_is_fornication.htm)

They say the following:

But suppose the man had a weapon and threatened to kill the girl if she failed to lie down with him? These scriptures do not weaken the argument or alter the situation by citing any circumstance that would justify her in not screaming. It plainly says she should scream.....Such Scriptural precedents are applicable to Christians, who are under command, "Flee from fornication." (1 Cor. 6:18) Thus if a Christian woman does not cry out and does not put forth every effort to flee, she would be viewed as consenting to the violation. .... if she should submit to the man's passionate wishes, she would be consenting to fornication or adultery"

So when this was written in 1964, a Jehovah's Witness woman who did not scream would be disfellowshiped from the faith..meaning all her JW friends couldn't even say hi to her and she would be considered rejected by god and worthy of death.

At least they don't actually stone her to death as the old testament commanded..jeez..the bible old testament is filled with some of the most despicable, heinous, and purely evil acts ever recorded on paper..and it's talking about God's commands and deeds! Ancient Jews sure dreamed up a evil, tyrannical and blood-thirsty god..well..so did most of humanity.

anyway..jus ranting about christianity and JW's in specific. How anyone can beleive the god described in the old testament is a wise, loving and merciful creator is beyond me.

[cee]

:bananarider:

[RedHedGurl]

um...yeeeeeeah...don't agree with that at all. If it's true that Jehovah's witnesses still hold to that then that's just horrible.

[DNAgirl]

What a bunch of crap! Obviously when those "books" were written women were not seen as being equal to men (thats the only excuse I could even come close to)

Another good reason why I will never adopt a religion.

[beth]

what if her mouth was taped/bound shut?
what if she was told she would be killed if she screamed?
what if she was unconscious?
the questions are endless.

[bboyneko]

black and white thinking 'You are either with us or against us" "evil doers" "axis of evil" all a western fundamentalist way of thought..true justice has no black and whites but greys, because justice takes into account circumstance and context, not just cold facts.

[Synthetikid]

how about this: if you rape a woman, you get your cock sawed off, then we pour h2s04 on the wound to 'cauterize' it.

::BTW deuteronomy is old testament and not followed in todays christianity, which i am all for bashing, but in this case it's unfounded.::

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by Synthetikid
::BTW deuteronomy is old testament and not followed in todays christianity, which i am all for bashing, but in this case it's unfounded.::

It is still according to christian beleif, the historical record of God's laws and dealings with man. The stone a woman if she dosent scream, according to christian beleif was gods command, as was the slaughtering of infants and babies as recorded in 1 Samuel Chapter 15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=1+samuel+15&NIV_version=yes&language=english)

To say: "Because we no longer follow what person A told us to do in the past, we can not critisize person A for their past actions"

Dosen't hold up. God commanded the stoning of raped women and the slaughtering of babies. Wether he does that any more isn't relevant to the argument that: "God did cruel and evil things in the old testament"

He's the same god supposedly, according to christian beleif in the new testament.

[Synthetikid]

it's dogma, not god itself, hate the corrupt religion (who were the people that actually wrote the religion: chauvanists from over 2000 years ago).

thats like saying we should hate all germans now because some of them became nazi's in the first half of last century.

[bboyneko]

I am critisizing the god of the bible, which is considered holy and true by many christians. I can understand christians who beleive mostly the new testament and feel the old testament is wildly innacurate since it portrays a vengeful, hateful, cruel and blood-thirsty god.

[easysl]

wtf???????????? Are you fucking sick?

BTW you might wanna rephrase your question cos you can never consent to rape.


actually, don't re phrase it mmmkay

[jrob]

wow, now this is more fucked up than I ever could have dreamed when i clicked on it.

[iminxtc]

no comment

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by easysl
wtf???????????? Are you fucking sick?

BTW you might wanna rephrase your question cos you can never consent to rape.


actually, don't re phrase it mmmkay

you sound like you are yelling at me? Did you read my post? I am condemning the line of judeo/christian thinking that cooked up this concept to begin with.

[asian]

can we not talk about incendiary topics such as this on the board? i thought we had been over this.

[retail]

Originally posted by bboyneko
I am critisizing the god of the bible, which is considered holy and true by many christians. I can understand christians who beleive mostly the new testament and feel the old testament is wildly innacurate since it portrays a vengeful, hateful, cruel and blood-thirsty god.

did you not capitalize the word "god" on purpose?

:shady:

[easysl]

Originally posted by bboyneko


you sound like you are yelling at me? Did you read my post? I am condemning the line of judeo/christian thinking that cooked up this concept to begin with.


for me that question is beyond the pale. its not worth asking cos the answer is obvious, which really makes me question your motives for findng out other peoples opinion

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by easysl



for me that question is beyond the pale. its not worth asking cos the answer is obvious, which really makes me question your motives for findng out other peoples opinion

this is a RANT AND RAVE forum, i was ranting not asking a question. Same as if you post a rant/rave about how you dislike peanut butter and jelly sandwiches..you arent asking peoples opinions of PB&J but simply ranting.

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by retail


did you not capitalize the word "god" on purpose?

:shady:

Did you spell out the word/name god completley, instead of spelling it g_d as jews do on purpose? Are you somehow being disrespectful to jews by spelling it out god instead of g_d as is their custom?

[easysl]

Originally posted by bboyneko


this is a RANT AND RAVE forum, i was ranting not asking a question. Same as if you post a rant/rave about how you dislike peanut butter and jelly sandwiches..you arent asking peoples opinions of PB&J but simply ranting.

i really don't see what difference in opinion sane people will have on this issue

[asian]

cut it out. i do not want to have to ask again. nothing good can come out of this little rant.

yes censorship is a bitch. deal with it.

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by easysl


i really don't see what difference in opinion sane people will have on this issue

I again will state: I was not seeking opinion but rather ranting, i.e expressing my disgust at a passage in the bible and at certain modern religions that still follow this custom /law. I am making people aware of it by ranting as well. That was my only intent, not to see if people had a differing opinion.

[The Logic Theorist]

1) The actual text of the Torah you are talking about as follows, I think this is a necessary starting off point to any agruement, as opposed to what a Jehovah's Witness wrote in 1964.

23] In the case of a vifgin who is engaged to a man- if a man comes upon her in town and lies with her, 24] you shall take the two of them out to the gate of that town and stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help in the town, and the man because he violated his neighbor's wife. Thus you will sweep away evil from your midst. 25] But if the man comes upon the engaged girl in the open country, and the man lies with her by force, only the man who lay with her shall die, 26] but you shall do nothing to the girl. The girl did not incur the death penalty, for this case is like that of a man attacking another and murdering him. 27] He came upon her in the open; though the engaged girl cried for help, there was no one to save her.

2) This passage is being taken out of context and used as an arguement for something it does not express. The text of this portion of Deuteronomy is primarily about Biblical law pertaining to adultery. The message inherent in the text is in the case of sex between a man and a woman who was engaged to someone else, the relations were still considered adulterous and punishable by death. Not crying out was simply analagous for it being consensual, and therefore the penalty carried by both. Meanwhile, the example of the woman in the country who is beyond help clearly shows that in a case of rape, the penalty for the alduterous relationship should be carried by the man only. This is further evident by the way Jewish law was carried out.

3) The Torah as interpreted by Jews is an oral tradition, and therefore a living document. Metaphors abound. Christians have a tendancy to both take things literally AND take them out of context to prove points that were never intended to be conveyed in the text. Before you down anything written in the Torah, you should read it for yourself and understand the context and meaning of the stories.

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by asian
cut it out. i do not want to have to ask again. nothing good can come out of this little rant.

yes censorship is a bitch. deal with it.

From the buzz registration agreement:

By clicking the Agree button, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

Here are some recent threads that were allowed to run their course:


http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17872
Christian Nation

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2417
LCD and Tim Leary

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23648
babies killed by god in old testament

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23332
Jesus and religion around me

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19666
Church vs gays



http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17214
Palestinians and israelis

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17196
Evo vs creation 2

http://www.buzzlife.com/mssg_brd/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17178
Evo vs creation


I bow to your authority, but just pointing out that many other threads about religion have been posted recently with nothing bad happening because of it.

[Buddafly]

nevermind

[Synthetikid]

thus being incendiary... at least this is interesting.

[easysl]

I really dont think this is a discussion mmmkay

[cee]

:bananarider:

[MLikens]

Wow i never knew that..... that is crazy real crazy..... Rape is nothing to joke about or consider doing so dont get the wrong idea from this passage :) Rape is wrong in any way... their is nothing good about rape

[asian]

and once again i will exercise my unfair authority and ask you to stop.
if you have a problem with it, feel free to contact me.

[asian]

Originally posted by logictheorist
1) The actual text of the Torah you are talking about as follows, I think this is a necessary starting off point to any agruement, as opposed to what a Jehovah's Witness wrote in 1964.

23] In the case of a vifgin who is engaged to a man- if a man comes upon her in town and lies with her, 24] you shall take the two of them out to the gate of that town and stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help in the town, and the man because he violated his neighbor's wife. Thus you will sweep away evil from your midst. 25] But if the man comes upon the engaged girl in the open country, and the man lies with her by force, only the man who lay with her shall die, 26] but you shall do nothing to the girl. The girl did not incur the death penalty, for this case is like that of a man attacking another and murdering him. 27] He came upon her in the open; though the engaged girl cried for help, there was no one to save her.

2) This passage is being taken out of context and used as an arguement for something it does not express. The text of this portion of Deuteronomy is primarily about Biblical law pertaining to adultery. The message inherent in the text is in the case of sex between a man and a woman who was engaged to someone else, the relations were still considered adulterous and punishable by death. Not crying out was simply analagous for it being consensual, and therefore the penalty carried by both. Meanwhile, the example of the woman in the country who is beyond help clearly shows that in a case of rape, the penalty for the alduterous relationship should be carried by the man only. This is further evident by the way Jewish law was carried out.

3) The Torah as interpreted by Jews is an oral tradition, and therefore a living document. Metaphors abound. Christians have a tendancy to both take things literally AND take them out of context to prove points that were never intended to be conveyed in the text. Before you down anything written in the Torah, you should read it for yourself and understand the context and meaning of the stories.
thank you.

[The Logic Theorist]

you're welcome.

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by asian
and once again i will exercise my unfair authority and ask you to stop.
if you have a problem with it, feel free to contact me.

Sometimes I think I'm the official http://www.krittersinthemailbox.com/animals/sheep/cvaf50t.jpg

of the buzzboard :sadblue:

[The Logic Theorist]

One sheep, two sheep, three sheep, black sheep.

Seriously man I don't think anyone puts enough effort into you in particular to make it rational for you to feel singled out like you do. Life isn't fair for one, and this isn't a public forum where your first amendment rights are protected for two. Those threads may have had some more value to the people in them. OR maybe a different mod was on at that moment, or they were just in a different mood.

Either way, unwad panties and go read the masturbation thread.

[bboyneko]

Originally posted by logictheorist
One sheep, two sheep, three sheep, black sheep.

Seriously man I don't think anyone puts enough effort into you in particular to make it rational for you to feel singled out like you do. Life isn't fair for one, and this isn't a public forum where your first amendment rights are protected for two. Those threads may have had some more value to the people in them. OR maybe a different mod was on at that moment, or they were just in a different mood.

Either way, unwad panties and go read the masturbation thread.

Masturbation: we can all agree to that, especially mutual masturbation wilst watching midget bukaka porn in a kiddie pool filled with sugar-free jell-o pudding

[The Logic Theorist]

Amen.

[MaryAnarchy]

dude, this is horrible. but i guess it could come in handy to know, if it was a real law. which it's not, i'm assuming?

[MaryAnarchy]

threads about sensitive topics are usually cut off right away. even on other message boards. it can get ugly.

[asian]

you are not the black sheep. you are the crazy cat guy. :D

[asian]

and you didn't answer your phone in time the other day

[Capital Zero]

you can find all sorts of effed up shit in the bible.
nothing new.

[Valencia Styles]

i saw this in your LJ and religion is a shitty alternative when it comes to sticky situations such as this (no pun intended).... i have my own brand of catholocism that does not include confessing my sins to a middle man, and going to church each and every sunday... i have respect and love for god in my own way shape and form, and if he doesn't accept me into heaven, then oh well.... my life has been fun and if i don't get another one, i hope i'm remembered as someone who always made people laugh :)

[bboyneko]

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/6304139632.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I like the brand of catholocism that involves flying around with sally field

[obsol33t]

forget the bible, the internet is the one final refrence on all things these days. the bible is even on the internet. somewhere...

[MaryAnarchy]

the principia discordia is as well.
that's a bible to some people.

[Julierose]

um... yeah... **exits thread**

[MaryAnarchy]

thanks for your deep and insightful contribution to this thread, julierose.