Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by Testify, Sep 23, 2007.
I'd like to see a Christian try and justify that please.
Erm why should a christian justify it:unsure: it's old testament, christians follow the new testament.
The Holy Bible is a good book to keep next to your toilet to wipe your butt with when you run out of TP.
That was completely unnecessary.
As to the quote, no-one can justify rape, however, during those times, the woman would have been "ruined" and no-one would have married her for the rest of her life. She would have lived a life of disgrace and been a burden on her family. Marrying her and making her "respectable" would have been the most humane thing to do at the time, giving her the opportunity to have a family and avoid being shunned by the community.
I just want to say that this is a very dangerous mindset. You can absolutely justify rape, you can justify anything, because this is essential in every court case. I'm not saying it's right, it's absolutely not right and it scars people for a long time, but if you just dismiss it then you'll get unfair sentences.
Well, it is the Soap Box, strong opinions are said here.
Well, I don't think rape is ever justifiable. And I do understand that strong opinions are expressed in the Soap Box, but I had hoped we lived in a society in which respects people's viewpoints enough to refrain from such base vulgarity when referring to something many people hold sacred.
Well, that's the interesting thing, it's the soap box on suicide forum, so you'll find a lot of outburts, and people have bad experience with religion. So it's less directed at you than at the op, because the op is essentially talking to himself.
It's very important to try to justify crimes, people seem to have a hard time when it comes to rape. Murder is much easier. Yes a lot of the crimes are given much too light sentences, but it's easy to make a legal misjudgement. If the rape committer has a mental illness, it's very easy to say put him to death but you have to take some allowance for a grey area.
"what so many people hold sacred" yes but sacredness is relative (i know that seems contradictory, because for the one who defends the sacred "sacred" has the meaning of "eternal truth"). To hindus cows are sacred. On a discussion forum anything has to be discussable, even the most sacred truths.
That may be. And I know people get their panties in a twist over religion, but that just irritates me. I would never talk about the Koran or Bhagavad Gita in that way because I know that to some people, they are sacred texts and I try to respect that.
I see your point about justifying crimes, but I think that is where a great deal of lawyers manipulate cases and twist the facts.
Well, if anything is twisted I (we, hopefully) can only hope that they get called on that and repurcussions happen.
Oh, and you can say what so many people hold sacred because there are things what so many people hold sacred.
So because something's "sacred" to some sensitive souls it can not be discussed? No, I don't agree. The biblical quote of the original post was sacred to the old hebrews, the koran justifies violent jihad, the aztecs held their human sacrifices to be sacred... These things have to be discussed! That is exactly what "sacred" is - a dogma that can not be discussed but which is often useless, something which can only be discovered when the sacredness of it is indeed reflected upon. But maybe I'm digressing from the original meaning of this thread...
No - I was disagreeing that you can't say what is sacred to so many people, in other words, it's wrong here to say you can't make that generalization (about anything), because a large group of people have something in common.
I absolutely believe these things should be discussed and dogma and scripture dissected. That is the only way to really learn. I was merely annoyed at the person who said the Bible makes good toilet paper. I don't think that kind of talk is necessary and has no place in a religious debate of any kind.
All people take their beliefs seriously and see them as a part of who they are. As such, they get offended and see it as an attack on self if one questions them. Religion is any dogma that is adhered to uncritically and cannot be openly discussed, analysed and corrected or discarded. This includes a great many atheist religions dressed up as "Science". Dogma's are generally communicated to the masses by a priviledged few, who are the only ones deemed capable of understanding and knowing about their contents, with those amongst the herd who disagree with and question them considered "sinful", "disloyal", "unpatriotic", "anti-science" or "haters", etc.
now if everyone understood this we could actually make some progress...
Religion is not necessarily dogma.
True ybt. Also I firmly believe that faith and religion should be scrutinized and carefully weighed. In fact my religion (Catholic) demands that we do our due diligence in questioning our beliefs and fully forming our own consciences. Also, I do not see why science and religion cannot be compatible.