Answering old threads thread

[Arthur Brain]

Good old common sense seems to be out of vogue, Artie.

Sometimes I wonder if it was ever 'in vogue' nowadays...

 

[Idolater]

Again, anthropomorphism isn't the issue here

Where are you seeing anthropomorphism?

and neither's America frankly.

Americans believe that our moral rights are "inbuilt" but not our morals. That's why we make laws authorizing the punishment of those who break our rights, violent criminals. The inbuilt moral right against being raped is categorically and unequivocally absolute.

 

[Derf]

It's inbuilt. I despise cruelty, abuse, violation and all manner associated. Those who don't and make excuses for such have something that isn't so inbuilt, like psychopaths, sociopaths and the like. I've categorically and unequivocally stated that any form of rape is abhorrent. You haven't. How so?

Who built us and included such a thing?

 

[Derf]

You don't know all that much all round do you?

Certainly not your answers to my questions.

 

[Clete]

Nature is lit.

So much for natural law theory.

The way animals treat each other doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with natural law!

Natural law is based on careful examination of HUMAN nature! It works because we, unlike the animals, have been created in the image and likeness of God.

It is precisely natural law that tells us that humans ought not act like animals!

What's more, it is innate. You can pretend like natural law doesn't work but you're only lying to yourself.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who [d]suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is [e]manifest [f]in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and [g]Godhead, so that they are without excuse,​

 

[Clete]

If we intervened aggressively in the duck world to stop the raping ducks would go extinct. Unless we carefully put the right number of males and females together, you have to outnumber the males dramatically with females in order for them to stop on their own apparently. There's something about their dopamine system that tells them that raping will be rewarding so they do it coz they're just dumb ducks anyway, but you can manipulate them so that they'll stop raping by outnumbering them greatly with way more females than males, then they'll stop raping all on their own. Something in their dopamine system clicks, and now raping doesn't seem like such a potentially rewarding behavior to them anymore.

Natural law theory used to be where we thought we got our morals from. Before America. America just said we get our moral rights from God. The rest is history, and so is natural law theory as proof of absolute morals.

This, again, is idiotically false.

There's far to many ducks for such an effort to be successful but, theoretically speaking, if we wanted to intervene, ducks could be selectively bred away from their aggressive mating tactics.

Also, what ducks are doing IS NOT RAPE!!!

 

[Skeeter]

It is absolutely NOT true in any correct sense of the word "rape".

Rape NEVER has anything to do with reproduction and rarely ever results in a pregnancy.

Ludicrous statement. Stress has only a mild impact on the potential of fertilization. This type of thinking leads to blaming women who have a child after being raped. All rape is illegitimate and biological processes do not shut down a pregnancy based on whether there is consent.

 

[annabenedetti]

Ludicrous statement. Stress has only a mild impact on the potential of fertilization. This type of thinking leads to blaming women who have a child after being raped. All rape is illegitimate and biological processes do not shut down a pregnancy based on whether there is consent.

I didn't pay enough attention to this part of Clete's post when I liked it, and I should have. I agreed with the overall intent of his post but you are right to highlight the very real potential of a pregnancy resulting from rape. I know of one such situation myself.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Who built us and included such a thing?

Well, with you it's not so apparent it has been included considering that you bring provisos into the equation where a normally functioning person would just flat out condemn rape period, no matter what. If you're looking for God as an answer then fine, I'm cool with that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Certainly not your answers to my questions.

Eh, what was tripping you up exactly?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Where are you seeing anthropomorphism?

Americans believe that our moral rights are "inbuilt" but not our morals. That's why we make laws authorizing the punishment of those who break our rights, violent criminals. The inbuilt moral right against being raped is categorically and unequivocally absolute.

All that stuff about ducks for a start.

Americans have differing sets of beliefs on issues as do peoples of any given nationality so you wanna quit with that nonsense.

 

[Clete]

Ludicrous statement. Stress has only a mild impact on the potential of fertilization.

I said nothing about stress and don't really know anything about the mechanisms involved but it is a well established fact that, while it does happen from time to time, the overwhelmingly vast majority of rapes do not result in a pregnancy. I think the actual number is 5%.

This type of thinking leads to blaming women who have a child after being raped.

That's stupid. Blaming them for what?

All rape is illegitimate and biological processes do not shut down a pregnancy based on whether there is consent.

Never said it did but one way or another, rape is an extremely unreliable way to reproduce human beings.

 

[Clete]

I didn't pay enough attention to this part of Clete's post when I liked it, and I should have. I agreed with the overall intent of his post but you are right to highlight the very real potential of a pregnancy resulting from rape. I know of one such situation myself.

I never suggested that pregnancy was impossible but merely that they do not normally occur as a result of rape. The point being that rape has nothing to do with reproduction and if it did, it doesn't work very well at all. This may have several causes, not the least of which being that a woman isn't able to conceive except for about about a week or so every month so that alone would tend toward something close to 75% of rapes not causing pregnancy. There are other factors as well, of course, because the real number isn't 25% its only 5%, and the majority of those were rapes perpetrated by family members, by the way.
The point here is that I was not suggesting that rape cannot or does not ever result in a pregnancy. A point, by the way, which is obvious enough that anyone who thought I was saying otherwise was looking for a reason to disagree. One wonders what the motive would be there.

 

[Derf]

Eh, what was tripping you up exactly?

Where does a "moral compass" come from? You almost answered in that last post,

If you're looking for God as an answer then fine, I'm cool with that.

but it was half-hearted at best. Do you believe in God? Do you think there is some being that has both a moral discernment and the power to enforce it? If you don't like the title "God", what would you call him?

where a normally functioning person would just flat out condemn rape period,

You've begged the question by defining a thing a man does to his wife as "rape", and then stated that it is immoral to do so based on your definition. Not all agree:
"Legally speaking, a husband cannot be accused of raping his wife in Nigeria, going by this definition of rape. Also in most African traditions, it will be ludicrous for a wife to accuse her husband of rape. Even the family that the woman came from will wonder if their daughter is sane. It is believed that once a man pays a woman’s bride price, he has all rights over her..."

Are you saying Nigerians and most Africans as a race are morally bankrupt?

 

[Idolater]

All that stuff about ducks for a start.

Where I anthropomorphized ducks? I mentioned them. That does not mean I've anthropomorphized them isn't that an odd thing to think on your part honestly that the simple mention of a creature means anthropomorphism is being employed?

Americans have differing sets of beliefs on issues as do peoples of any given nationality

Americans believing that Black women have an inbuilt absolute right against being raped is not one of multiple legitimate or moral "differing sets of beliefs on issues."

so you wanna quit with that nonsense.

Nah. No thanks. Not til the whole world quits with the nonsense that serious morality is something that good people can disagree about. Take rape for instance. No one's allowed to think that breaking any Latin woman's absolute right against being raped is ever permissible, no matter the conditions, ever.

I think you should quit with the nonsense of calling arguing for the absolute right of Jewish women against being raped "nonsense" frankly.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

Are you saying Nigerians and most Africans as a race are morally bankrupt?

I don't know how Artie will answer, but for me the and answer is as a culture they show signs of moral bankruptcy -- YES.

A wife has obligations and duties to her husband. She must meet sexual needs, but she has a say about when, where, and how. If a husband forced the issue and had his way, that is sinful and a horrible crime.

 

[Derf]

I don't know how Artie will answer, but for me the and answer is as a culture they show signs of moral bankruptcy -- YES.

A wife has obligations and duties to her husband. She must meet sexual needs, but she has a say about when, where, and how. If a husband forced the issue and had his way, that is sinful and a horrible crime.

But is it rape?

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

But is it rape?

It is sexual assault of some kind. I don't really care if it is grouped in with rape or not.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Where does a "moral compass" come from? You almost answered in that last post,

but it was half-hearted at best. Do you believe in God? Do you think there is some being that has both a moral discernment and the power to enforce it? If you don't like the title "God", what would you call him?


You've begged the question by defining a thing a man does to his wife as "rape", and then stated that it is immoral to do so based on your definition. Not all agree:
"Legally speaking, a husband cannot be accused of raping his wife in Nigeria, going by this definition of rape. Also in most African traditions, it will be ludicrous for a wife to accuse her husband of rape. Even the family that the woman came from will wonder if their daughter is sane. It is believed that once a man pays a woman’s bride price, he has all rights over her..."

Are you saying Nigerians and most Africans as a race are morally bankrupt?

What, you gonna point to other regimes like Saudi Arabia as well where women don't have anywhere near the same rights as we have in the West? When put on the spot where it comes to forcing oneself on another you answered with "depends" so you don't get to dictate anything where it comes to morality from any sort of "Godly" perspective. The only ethical response on that particular would be "No". You don't get to wriggle out of a hole of your own making by pointing to regimes that are undeniably atrocious and will hopefully be kicked into touch as some have but a long way to go unfortunately. Where you and I live women aren't second class citizens and have equal rights. Not to be raped in the marriage bed being one for example.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Where I anthropomorphized ducks? I mentioned them. That does not mean I've anthropomorphized them isn't that an odd thing to think on your part honestly that the simple mention of a creature means anthropomorphism is being employed?

Americans believing that Black women have an inbuilt absolute right against being raped is not one of multiple legitimate or moral "differing sets of beliefs on issues."

Nah. No thanks. Not til the whole world quits with the nonsense that serious morality is something that good people can disagree about. Take rape for instance. No one's allowed to think that breaking any Latin woman's absolute right against being raped is ever permissible, no matter the conditions, ever.

I think you should quit with the nonsense of calling arguing for the absolute right of Jewish women against being raped "nonsense" frankly.

The whole duck argument was nonsense in relation as explained prior.

Bringing nationality into morality is just you waving the stars and stripes about, it's pathetic. My stance on rape is clear as all get out frankly.