If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sky.com)   Rapist suggests marrying victim in an attempt to get a lighter sentence. Judge says, "Yeah, that could work, we'll ask her..."   (sky.com) divider line 339
    More: Sick  
•       •       •

38879 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 May 2005 at 3:35 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



339 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-05-04 04:38:01 PM
Contraband Sandwich:

the logistics of ramming someone's shoulder up one's ass is pretty intriguing (sp?)...

Contraband, I believe you are admirably twisted.
 
2005-05-04 04:38:31 PM
You must be American

Aye. Proudly.

Because that's the exact same thing the rest of the world says when they hear about 'Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire', celebrity sex tapes and Bush's re-election....

You are talking about a certain percentage of Americans there - then generalizing to all of us. You should not do things like that, it makes you look like a dolt. Thanks for the troll though - it made me feel special.
 
2005-05-04 04:39:21 PM
dbaggins:

If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (Deuteronomy 22:23-29)

this passage has been the law of the land vis a vis rape in christian nations for thousands of years.


Given what would have happened in leiu of this law 2000 years ago, where the rape victim would have been ostracized from society, the family would have disowned her, and she would have ended up destitute, was it not a better alternative to force the man to support the woman for the remainder of her life?

Was Deuteronomy not a book of rules written to maintain order in a nomadic tribe thousands of years ago? Why are it and Leviticus constantly quoted by bible-thumpers on the issue of gay marriage, and atheists on the issue of human rights violations? Me not understand...
 
2005-05-04 04:39:32 PM
The law was passed down by Moses, who was divinely inspired, so technically it come from God. Funny how when someone points how something horrible in the bible, everyone yells that it "was taken out of context" or that it "no longer applies". If God is the same as he is today, yesterday, and forever, then the old laws should be treated with respect by Christians today. Even Jesus said he hasn't come to destroy the laws. "Give unto Caeser..."

But the laws in the old testament weren't issued to "Christians", they were issued to Moses and his people. God revealed laws through His prophets at different phases of time, and to different people who lived (and live) in different times. Just as God makes some people tall and some people short, He can be the same, but His relationship to us can seem different as a result of our differences.

I don't see anything wrong with saying that the law you folks are referencing is not consistent with more recent revelation given from God.
 
2005-05-04 04:39:35 PM
losterato: I believe they have the 3rd largest muslim population of any contry.

They also have the 2nd largest population of any country.
 
2005-05-04 04:40:14 PM
dolemite30: He needs to be Ass Raped, Repeatedly, with a Pine Apple.

Speaking of admirably twisted , have you met Contraband sandwich??
You guys are cracking me up and it's not even friday.
 
2005-05-04 04:40:20 PM
dolemite30

He needs to be Ass Raped, Repeatedly, with a Pine Apple.
No Lube.


Should we pull the pin first?

 
2005-05-04 04:40:34 PM
So in effect, the vast majority of rapes in the Islamic world are never reported because the woman doesn't have those handy 4 male eyewitnesses, forensic evidence be damned. She will keep her mouth shut and either get a hymen restoration surgery so that she will be marryable or she will grow old as a spinster.

Then there's always the practice of honor killings that a rape victim has to contend with, as well as people participating in consensual sex. Family honor means everything to an Arab. It is one of the foundations of their society. If you dishonor your family by doing something like having consensual sex or being raped, your family might kill you. Hundreds of these happen in Jordan alone every year and usually the murderer is either set free or given 1-2 years in jail.
 
2005-05-04 04:41:05 PM
Wow... so many Christians bashing the Old Testament... I guess then that homosexuality and every other "bad thing" in the OT is now just peachy, no?
 
2005-05-04 04:41:13 PM
The guy's got balls. Though, it would be proper to remedy that with all haste.
 
2005-05-04 04:42:18 PM
Programmer Cat: Should we pull the pin first?

Falling out of my chair,,,
 
2005-05-04 04:42:22 PM
That would be so completely gross!! That is a travisty to everyone involved! and EWWW!
 
2005-05-04 04:42:28 PM
Very christian of him!
 
2005-05-04 04:42:49 PM
Villain:

I guess then that homosexuality and every other "bad thing" in the OT is now just peachy, no?

Well it would have been, had you not made unfortunate use of the word "peachy."
 
2005-05-04 04:42:51 PM
Villain:
I'm not bashing it-but how many Christians do you know follow it to the letter? I mean everything; no trimming of the beard or the sides of the hair, no touching a woman during her period of uncleanliness...

Again, not bashing(not me anyway). Trying to find the truth.
 
2005-05-04 04:43:13 PM
Getting to your point, I think it applies to an extent, at least from what I see in today's world.

That's the thing with these "book based" religions --- what matters is what the book, says, not the way the world is. If 99% of people are violating a Biblical law, that makes them sinners, it doesn't make the law invalid. Divine laws make no logical sense taken any other way.

meaning you either believe in everything that was written by God in it, or you don't believe in the whole thing.

It's more subtle than that. You don't have to accept that the Bible is written by God, because it's not. It is acknowledged to be the work of humans (unlike what the Quran claims to be --- the word of God himself). That gives you a little leeway in interpreting the Bible, but that doesn't mean you can just ignore parts of the Bible wholesale. While the Bible wasn't written by God, it is presumed to be an accurate recollection of the teachings of Jesus (whose word is God's word). There are ideas that Jesus repeats consistently (eg: evangelism), and if you don't follow those, you are by all reasonable interpertations violating the laws of God.

yet hardly anyone pays attention to the stuff about pork, or say, uncleanliness

Those items specifically are ones that Jesus overrode in the New Testament.
 
2005-05-04 04:43:15 PM
smeegle

Falling out of my chair,,,

No fart?
 
2005-05-04 04:43:59 PM
Programmer Cat: No fart?

I filled my pants, if that counts for anything.
 
2005-05-04 04:44:50 PM
Programmer Cat: No fart?

Shhh girls don't...
Oh wait ah thats better. Hope no one come into my cubicle just yet.
 
2005-05-04 04:45:40 PM
demoralizer: So I take it we should use West Virginians as representations for Americans in general?

My point is that its kind of ridiculous to take your image, largely the result of hearing the worst news out of a country (usually from the most backwards parts of the country), and use it to judge the whole country. The engineers working in programming aren't from India's equivalent of Bumpkinville Alabama.
 
2005-05-04 04:46:24 PM
Hmmm...I read the headline and figured it had to be a Muslim country. And turns out I was right


Hindu country, but don't let pesky facts stop you from being an intolerant racists....

after all, they are all brown skinned pagans, right?
 
2005-05-04 04:48:45 PM
bbcrackmonkey: That's to prove adultry you retard. To prove rape all you need is the women's complaint and reasonable physical evidence.
 
2005-05-04 04:48:59 PM
......and people say that chivalry is dead!


hmpphhhhh!!
 
2005-05-04 04:49:00 PM
whoa. tried to take a break from work.
i think ill go back at it.
 
2005-05-04 04:50:12 PM
I don't claim to have the answers, but the smell of hypocrisy stands out from time to time. All I want to know is why some people think that the Biblical teachings concerning homosexuality are holy and divinely-inspired (based on the laws in Leviticus), yet somehow think that Deuteronomy (another book of the Pentateuch) are outright wrong. It seems like pick-and-choose dogma, which to me seems to be on the straight path to damnation.

And to answer your question, Artmageddon, I don't know any. Those who even try to do so are often seen as peculiar.
 
2005-05-04 04:50:42 PM
The first christians were jews. An early debate in the church (as covered in Acts somewhere) was a question about whether gentiles who became christians first had to become jews. Both Peter and Paul (at separate points) make it clear that gentiles do not have to become jews, and therefore are not under judaic law. Jews who accept Christ still are under judaic law however.

Jesus never overturned dietary restrictions, it was Peter and Paul. Jesus said that he didnt come to uphold the law, but to fulfil it.
 
2005-05-04 04:51:43 PM
heliosc:
I'm outta work, and on my way home. Thanks for being cool about your discourse on this :)
 
2005-05-04 04:51:50 PM
She should be allowed to stone his sorry ass to death. But then again, maybe he'll be the rapee when he goes to jail.
 
2005-05-04 04:53:07 PM
Good god bbcrackmonkey, you're on a role. Again, the 4 witnesses is for adultry, not rape (ie: if you and a girl are accused of sex outside marriage, 4 other people had to see the coitus). The hymen restoration surgery stories are from women who had consensual sex outside of marriage, and don't want their future husbands to find out.

The 'honor killings' have nothing to do with Islam. Sharia law absolves women of any sin resulting from a rape. The practice is a holdover from Arabic nomadic practices --- what they did prior to the advent of Islam.
 
2005-05-04 04:53:11 PM
apparently the omnipotent God doesn't take the time to put out new editions.

Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants . . .

Jesus commanded one man that he should not bury his father. Jesus commanded one man that he should bathe in a certain river. I've never seen that river, and believe I can follow Jesus's teachings without ever seeing that river. I also believe that people should not leave it to the dead to bury the dead.

Jesus also taught that a comforter would be sent, the holy Ghost. The comforter would teach all things. Without confirmation from the Holy Ghost, the letter of the law does not apply to the followers of Jesus.
 
2005-05-04 04:53:46 PM
Programmer Cat: "Should we pull the pin first?


Awesome!
 
2005-05-04 04:54:27 PM
Did someone say Pineapple?

 
2005-05-04 04:54:40 PM
dolemite30, I just couldn't resist.
 
2005-05-04 04:54:58 PM
Villain,

The laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy are both holy and divinely-inspired and also dont apply to gentiles.

In previou post replace "uphold" with "overturn", I think. I should probably look it up. Better to get it right.
 
2005-05-04 04:56:45 PM
It seems like pick-and-choose dogma, which to me seems to be on the straight path to damnation.

That's exactly the sort of thinking that sent Jesus to be tortured and crucified. The leaders of the Jews couldn't understand why the rules didn't always apply, even when the spirit of the rule was not present.
 
2005-05-04 04:57:01 PM
ScreamingDolai:

//wonder if some of the asshat farkers would make jokes if their mothers/wives/daughters were raped


Of course not - I'd marry her.
 
2005-05-04 04:58:08 PM
Tjos Weel: I believe Paul couched his argument in terms of what Jesus had said about certain Jewish laws.
 
2005-05-04 04:58:10 PM
Except I'm fairly certain that, at the very least, the Torah wasn't meant to be taken literally (At least, not the early parts. F*ck, dude, creation has two contradicting accounts .). Hell, even parts of the New Testament aren't meant to be taken literally... I'm fairly certain that two of the Gospel's stories about Jesus's Birth have Joseph going in different directions . One leaves the Wise Men out alltogether! But that's because the purpose of that story wasn't necessarily to be *factual*, but to explain how Jesus was a 'special person', and such (The trip into Egypt, back out is reminiscint of the story of Moses.. which I think it's supposed to be). The whole thing revolves around symbolism, something we seem to have a good deal of trouble with in this day and age.

Personally, I also see it as more of a guide book, than a rule book.. it was written by men, and transcribed by men. While it can be helpful, ultimately, one should also seek God for themselves, and not be content to sit idle of some segment disquiets you. If some portion of your faith feels wrong, dig it out and bring it into the light, and try to find why. Argue with yourself. Argue with other people. Seek God, the Good, or whatever it is you seek, in your own way. True, you may never reach it in this lifetime, but I think that you would be a better person because of it.

(Why, yes, I am a fan of the socratic Method...)
 
2005-05-04 04:58:41 PM
ScreamingDolai

//wonder if some of the asshat farkers would make jokes if their mothers/wives/daughters were raped

Yes, I'd make the jokes I've been making in this thread -- after I kill the rapist and convince the jury that it was justi-fukking-fiable homicide.
 
2005-05-04 04:59:12 PM
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

- Matthew 5:19

/Destroy was the word I was looking for. At least according to one translation.
 
2005-05-04 05:01:08 PM
"I don't see anything wrong with saying that the law you folks are referencing is not consistent with more recent revelation given from God."



this is what I will never understand. God is farking God! Why would he change laws each time he supposidly talked to someone? how does God change with the times? was he a hippie in the 60's? none of that makes any farking sense.

Someone please help me understand how the Old Testament god is not the same as the new testament god...
 
2005-05-04 05:03:00 PM

Someone please help me understand how the Old Testament god is not the same as the new testament god...


Same God, New Covenant.
 
2005-05-04 05:03:09 PM
Felgraf: You can only go so far by saying "the Bible was written by men, and might be inconsistent". Yes, that means the letter of the law doesn't apply. But the Bible is presumed to have been written by men of good faith. If it spends a large part of a verse discussion the punishments for various types of intercourse, it can safely be assumed the law the authors are trying to put forth. This is particularly true for stuff like homosexuality, on which the Bible is *very clear*. You can't just say, "oh, I don't believe in that part --- the Bible was written by men, after all", because an error of that magnitude is active deception, not a transcription error.
 
2005-05-04 05:03:48 PM
Pucca

Someone please help me understand how the Old Testament god is not the same as the new testament god...

The Old Testament God got some Hebrew pussy, mellowed out, and became the New Testament God. It's simple. All God needed was a good woman. Too bad she was somebody else's wife.
 
2005-05-04 05:04:55 PM
Tjos Weel:

2005-05-04 04:50:42 PM Tjos Weel

The first christians were jews. An early debate in the church (as covered in Acts somewhere) was a question about whether gentiles who became christians first had to become jews. Both Peter and Paul (at separate points) make it clear that gentiles do not have to become jews, and therefore are not under judaic law. Jews who accept Christ still are under judaic law however.

Jesus never overturned dietary restrictions, it was Peter and Paul. Jesus said that he didnt come to uphold the law, but to fulfil it.


In this sort of discussion you should be careful to separate "ceremonial" law and "moral" law. I put them in quotes cuz I can't remember the fancy names for them.

Jesus, or Paul, never changed any "moral" law. They both changed certain "ceremonial" laws.
 
2005-05-04 05:04:58 PM
<i>
Yes, I'd make the jokes I've been making in this thread -- after I kill the rapist and convince the jury that it was justi-fukking-fiable homicide.</i>

You would be better off going for temporary insanity. According to Law and Order "He raped my wife" is not an elgible affirmative defense for murder.

But "I don't know what happened your honor, I just say red and the next thing I know there was blood everywhere!" seems to work.
 
2005-05-04 05:05:25 PM
Felgraf:

Personally, I also see it as more of a guide book, than a rule book.. it was written by men, and transcribed by men. While it can be helpful, ultimately, one should also seek God for themselves, and not be content to sit idle of some segment disquiets you. If some portion of your faith feels wrong, dig it out and bring it into the light, and try to find why. Argue with yourself. Argue with other people. Seek God, the Good, or whatever it is you seek, in your own way. True, you may never reach it in this lifetime, but I think that you would be a better person because of it.

 
2005-05-04 05:06:18 PM
Pucca,

I just did a quick and dirty google search on dispensationalism - skip down to point 7.

http://answers.org/theology/dispensationalism.html
 
2005-05-04 05:06:57 PM
rodeofrog

gotcha !

I knew my crack about "new editions" would bring out a true believer comment.

Book of Mormon is a great example! just hook up my SeerStone Goggles(tm) and let's see what God wanted man to believe. Book of Moroni indeed !
 
2005-05-04 05:07:16 PM
Tjos Weel:

"[14] And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:
[15] There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.
[16] If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
[17] And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
[18] And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
[19] Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
[20] And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
[21] For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
[22] Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
[23] All these evil things come from within, and defile the man."

Jesus declaring dietary laws obsoleted. I think this is the sort of thing Paul based his abolishment of those laws on.
 
Displayed 50 of 339 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report