There was no need to discuss this whatsoever, when you pretend to have a firm foundation for your morals while others do not. What you do have is an opaque obstacle that you access your opinion through rather than apply reason and evidence directly.
Answering old threads thread
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
Of course He does. It's called free will.
Right Divider
Body part
That's a "right"?
glorydaz
Well-known member
Yes, and God created us with that right. Had He not, we'd all be puppets.
It's clearly a legal entitlement that God has extended to mankind.
That's what "choice" is all about.
Right Divider
Body part
I'm not arguing against free will. I'm just not sure that I'd call it a right.
Even that were true, which I do NOT concede, it wouldn't change the fact that rape has nothing to do with reproduction, which is why I've said repeatedly that all this nonsense you're talking about is irrelevant.
The rapist isn't trying to start a family. He isn't trying to extend his liniage or to create an heir. He isn't even trying to get his victim pregnant. That isn't what it's about AT ALL!
Of course, you knew that when you started down this entirely irrelevant rabbit trail in the first place.
Someone always decides that they're the one who is going to focus on the wrong thing. Might as well be you, I suppose.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Well, I'm thinking about it as a "right" as used in this example of rape.
Does a woman have a right to say no to her husband?
What gives her that "right", if not her free will?
Our ability to choose to resist or not is something that God created us with.
glorydaz
Well-known member
I agree, so it's basically a matter of FORCE.
Derf
Well-known member
I have no idea what you're trying to say.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Me neither.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
So you haven't got an answer then?
Yes, just as He also gave us the right to obey Him.
Having a choice is a simile of having a right.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
When I think of rights as enumerated in the Constitution, I think of those abilities that are recognized as being inviolate. In other words, actions that we can take without being regulated by government.
That doesn't fit with disobedience to God. In that context I would say that we don't have the "right" to disobey God. We have the ability but not without consequences.
Agreed.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Most rights have consequences.
Derf
Well-known member
Why are you going on when you said there's no need to go on?
None of it would be necessary if you would not write nonsense. You could have said that the human population only has a small percent borne of rape- instead of your nonsensical claim that somehow intercourse by rape bears less fecundity than other intercourse.
Men who rape their wives are often proud their seed took. Reproduction as a goal probably accounts for only a small number of rapes, but reproduction as a possibility remains despite intent. Rapists rarely wear protection.
Don't play dumb.
To say the least.
Rape is about violating someone in a way that is more profound than mere physical force. It is a violation that cannot be corrected or made amends for. It tears at not only the victim but at the very fabric of society itself. The death penalty for the convicted rapist is justice.
I am not responsible for what you read into my comments.
Silly ridiculous nonsensical stupidity.
A very very small number that's not even worth mentioning, just as is the number of husbands who rape their wives.
Exceptions typically prove the rule, not the other way around. If you cannot tolerate generalities, don't speak to me. I am not one who feels the need to explain that right turns are allowed every time I tell someone that a red traffic light means stop.
Clete