Anyone Who Thinks Another Person Deserves To Be Raped Is A Knob

[Rusha]

They DESERVE that money -

I would say what a stripper deserves is understanding (because they are most likely in their current job due to desperation) and encouragement to get the education and skills required for success in another career.

 

[patrick jane]

These woman are anonymous. They cannot be followed home.

Anybody can be followed anywhere

 

[Arthur Brain]

In context, you called my post a fail, since her post was in direct response to MY conversation, not YOURS with her.

Nope. I was addressing her comments solely in context to people 'deserving' of rape following on from your post. Big difference and one you really should be able to see.

yes, you are confusing contexts and grabbing at anything you think you can use even if it means you need to pretend i think something i dont. Thats called cheap. Running with garbage like that, helps other people lie about other people too.

No, I'm not but think that if you want. For example I don't think you actually believe that strippers at frat parties deserve to be raped and hadn't even suggested you thought that on here alone.

 

[patrick jane]

I would say what a stripper deserves is understanding (because they are most likely in their current job due to desperation) and encouragement to get the education and skills required for success in another career.

True, you caught me being a regular guy there. and believe me, I love to understand

 

[glorydaz]

The day will never come where I say that people actually deserve to be raped.

It's risky making such statements.


If you had a little four year old girl that some monster grabbed and raped her, and he was caught and thrown into prison, you might be singing a different tune when you heard he'd been raped or killed in his cell block. The fact is.....he would deserve whatever he got for the HORROR he inflicted on that little girl. If your bleeding heart claims otherwise, you're a liar as well as a fool.

 

[Rusha]

True, you caught me being a regular guy there.

Eh, much better than a person who insults and sneers at rape victims.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Nope. I was addressing her comments solely in context to people 'deserving' of rape following on from your post.

Um hello out there. She agreed with ME on the context i wrote about anyone can see that, she was also having a TOTALLY seperate conversation with YOU, my conversation to lifeisgood is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than yours with glory. You COMBINED the 2.

Big difference and one you really should be able to see.

Yes, i can clearly see you and many others grabbing things from context and running with your own error.

No, I'm not but think that if you want. For example I don't think you actually believe that strippers at frat parties deserve to be raped and hadn't even suggested you thought that on here alone.

Well yes, you did ask me about what i thought about it, 5 seperate times as if you didnt get my response the first time i said it and forced me to keep posting what i said as you "forgot"

One of them you did again just a couple pages back and needed to be reminded AGAIN:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4541992&postcount=1006

 

[Arthur Brain]

It's the Liberal's MO. Artie is a liberal, and there is simply no room in the liberal's mind for reasoning and common sense.

Artie will allow no "qualifiers" from others because then he'd have to actually address what a person is saying. But he insists on using "qualifiers" liberally in his rebuttal. It's a trick of an attorney who tries to keep pertinent evidence from being presented. "A yes or no answer" will not cut it if one wants the WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the truth.

Nice blathering stock in trade rhetoric going on there GD. Never heard the likes of that before...

:yawn:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Um hello out there. She agreed with ME on the context i wrote about anyone can see that, she was also having a TOTALLY seperate conversation with YOU, my conversation to lifeisgood is TOTALLY DIFFERENT than yours with glory. You COMBINED the 2.




Yes, i can clearly see you and many others grabbing things from context and running with your own error.




Well yes, you did ask me about what i thought about it, 5 seperate times as if you didnt get my response the first time i said it and forced me to keep posting what i said as you "forgot"

Um, yeh, hello out there too. Think what you want Angel. Not interested in another exchange where you just go all hysterical thanks.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Um, yeh, hello out there too. Think what you want Angel. Not interested in another exchange where you just go all hysterical thanks.

Im not interested in being misrepresented because people are too lazy to read context.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It's risky making such statements.


If you had a little four year old girl that some monster grabbed and raped her, and he was caught and thrown into prison, you might be singing a different tune when you heard he'd been raped or killed in his cell block. The fact is.....he would deserve whatever he got for the HORROR he inflicted on that little girl. If your bleeding heart claims otherwise, you're a liar as well as a fool.

Oh, so now you're admitting that rape is actually an inflicted horror? Good for you, that really is actual progress on your part, and not before time.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Im not interested in being misrepresented because people are too lazy to read context.

You and me both...

 

[glorydaz]

"You whore, you brought it on yourself" or "God allows suffering in our lives and we thru Christ can turn our suffering into a blessing to others of like sufferings in a way that most cannot witness, some who suffered tremendously can bring Yeshua into an encounter with a victim of rape and produce fruit in the lives of those who hear and see the love of God manifested in them."

As this is the garbage that grows in the active mind of a person too lazy to read what is actually written and too ignorant to respond to what was actually said. Keep up the good work, intoself. :thumb:

 

[glorydaz]

Oh, so now you're admitting that rape is actually an inflicted horror? Good for you, that really is actual progress on your part, and not before time.

It certainly is to a four year old. I've always said rape is a horrible thing to be visited on any innocent victim. It can be just desserts to a stripper who is working hard to entice men to sin. Don't like to hear the hard truths, do you, Artie?

Bad behavior deserves consequences. One would hope you'd teach your children that is the case. When you cheat in school, you deserve to be caught. You know.....all those simple common sense facts of life.

 

[glorydaz]

Um, yeh, hello out there too. Think what you want Angel. Not interested in another exchange where you just go all hysterical thanks.

What kind of a whack job are you, boy? Angel hysterical? :rotfl:

You're a walking emotional basket case, prone to frequent temper tantrums....... unable to use common sense and reason. Too funny.

 

[lifeisgood]

Not well said at all, she cited a link, i cited the scriptures that say it outright.

Both of you need to get in your bible instead of links twisting what it says plain as day. See above where i quoted the word and its clearly said david would be punished with the loss of his child, in addition to his own household turning against him.

I guess you did not have the time to read the article yet.
I understand, it is a very long one, it took me a while to read.
It contains many scriptures.
It comes from a study of 2 Samuel 12:14-31.
I certainly could not place the whole article here.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Anybody can be followed anywhere

Which is more likely? Being followed home from a strip bar or hiring a detective to track down a nude model? If they are models, they likely hire protection and are rarely out alone. Do you seriously think the two are equivalent in terms of risk of harm?

 

[lifeisgood]

How is it a fail, to show what the scriptures say, that prove what lifeisgood said was wrong?

God did punish david with the loss of his child, it says it outright. (to anyone who can read)

Can you imagine this child born of adultery being on the throne of king of David’s earthly kingdom?

Would the people respect and accept this illegitimate (I have to be PC) child as their ruler?

No, I believe God protected the child from the consequences of David’s actions and David accepted God's protection.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It certainly is to a four year old. I've always said rape is a horrible thing to be visited on any innocent victim. It can be just desserts to a stripper who is working hard to entice men to sin. Don't like to hear the hard truths, do you, Artie?

No you haven't. In fact you've shown the most asinine ignorance as to just how devastating rape can be in and of itself to a victim to the point where it's not a hideous ordeal unless the assailant physically deforms their prey in the process. Only someone completely unfamiliar with rape could even think about doing that. What you're dispensing here isn't 'truth' in any form but just a vile and twisted load of self righteous pap.

Bad behavior deserves consequences. One would hope you'd teach your children that is the case. When you cheat in school, you deserve to be caught. You know.....all those simple common sense facts of life.

One would hope you get to know what empathy is at some point because that would be the core of any foundational lesson I'd be teaching, and I've met kids who have a darn sight more than you as it is.

 

[lifeisgood]

She agreed with what i said which has a specific context and was in response to a specific post, so how is a "fail" either the bible says what it says or it doesnt.

Perhaps you need to stop confusing contexts.

So basically you said what i said was a fail. please define what is fail about it, do you deny God punished David with the loss of His child and that scripture says it specifically?

Again for context:

You dont know your bible, it says the loss of the child would be his punishment from God, outright. 2 Samuel 12 7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that had been too little, I also would have given you much more! 9 Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in His sight? You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon. 10 Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.’ 11 Thus says the Lord: ‘Behold, I will raise up adversity against you from your own house; and I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. 12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, before the sun.’” 13 So David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die.” 15 Then Nathan departed to his house. And the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became ill. 16 David therefore pleaded with God for the child, and David fasted and went in and lay all night on the ground. So, is your not seeing it willful or selective reading? It says it plain as day.

where is the fail? Or will you like many others pretend i said anything that i didnt say by taking what i say from context?

PS lest anyone want to pretend i think something i dont, see this post for my position on all of this: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4526405&postcount=861

You do understand what 'per se' means, right?
I do not see the death of the child as David's punishment, per se.