|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 35270
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 7:29 am
Brenda Brenda: I am more shocked by the picture on the bottom left of the story than by the story itself... I mean, seriously??? (got nothing to do with the story, just the "Photo of the day"...)  Vegetarians... 
|
Posts: 3329
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 7:36 am
Thanos Thanos: Not to defend the Muslims or anything, but this viewpoint isn't exactly uncommmon among certain alleged Christians either: $1: Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?
I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about, I don't know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn't rape, it's a he said-she said where it's just too easy to lie about it.
Was the way in which your statement was portrayed correct?
Yes. Feminists, if they get tired of a husband or if they want to fight over child custody, they can make an accusation of marital rape and they want that to be there, available to them.
So you see this as more of a tool used by people to get out of marriages than as legitimate-
Yes, I certainly do. For the unaware, Schafly isn't some TeaBircher noobie stepping her foot into it. She's a long-time social 'conservative' who's been a big force in the Republican kulturkampf dating as far back as the early Reagan years. This sort of patriarchal primitivism is not unique to Islam. It infects all monotheistic religion and has a very nasty tendency to pop it's head out of the swamp with astonishing regularity. Do you not believe that there is any relationship between marriage and sexual relations? This seems to me like a reasonable perspective of traditional marriage. I would be careful before making silly attacks against Phyllis Schlafly, this is the woman who was singlehandedly responsible for defeating the Equal Rights Amendment. When she began her campaign against it, it was supported by both parties, 90% of Congress, most governors, and the majority of media in the whole country. She went to law school in her fifties during this campaign and graduated near the top of her class. This is one of the most capable women of modern times.
|
Brenda
CKA Uber
Posts: 50938
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:18 am
$1: Do you not believe that there is any relationship between marriage and sexual relations? In Canada, your marriage ends (and your separation starts) when you stop having sexual relations.
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:56 am
Pseudonym Pseudonym: I would be careful before making silly attacks against Phyllis Schlafly, this is the woman who was singlehandedly responsible for defeating the Equal Rights Amendment.
And what a feather in her cap that is. I mean the horror: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.[1][2]
|
Posts: 8851
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 12:34 pm
Brenda Brenda: $1: Do you not believe that there is any relationship between marriage and sexual relations? In Canada, your marriage ends (and your separation starts) when you stop having sexual relations. Introduction The rules about marriage, separation and divorce are fairly straightforward, despite some fairly common misunderstandings. To be able to marry, the spouses must, among other things, be unmarried, sane and over a certain age. They must also be married by a person properly licenced to conduct marriages, either a civil marriage commissioner or an authorized religious official. The process for getting married in British Columbia is described in detail in the How do I ? section of this website, and the following chapter, Marriage & Divorce > Marriage, provides a lot more information about the law relating to marriage. Separation simply means making the decision that the marriage has broken down. You don't have to move out to separate, you just have to tell your spouse that things have come to an end and that you'd like to end the relationship. The ins and outs of separation are discussed in the Marriage & Divorce > Separation chapter, and some of the things that a couple thinking of separating might want to keep in mind are listed in the How do I ? section. The emotional dimensions of ending a relationship are discussed in the chapter Marriage & Divorce > Separating Emotionally.
|
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:14 pm
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog: For the love of fucking Christ!! Aren't you capable of anything else? We all know that you have 'issues' with religion because you go on ad infinitum ad nauseum ad absurdum. Go see a therapist already if it's serious. The last time scholars checked, Jesus didn't write the Bible, and those who did lived between 2500 BC and AD 100 ...or was that not covered in sociology?
I love it how apologists always say, 'Well we did it too....in the past'. Exactly, in the past and we've learned to outgrow these backward ideas. The converse can't be said about other groups. Religion plays but a small part in our society, while in the case of the group being discussed, it is the foundation of their entire society. it governs every aspect of their lives. Sorry did I hit a bit of a hot button. Maybe you should go clam down. I'm not the one exploding at people. Yet again you also fail to address anything I've said and resort to trying to attack my character. If you don't like what I'm saying then just ignore it and move on. I think Christianity and Islam are both piles of dung and I"m sick of Christians trying to criticize other religions with what they think is some kind of higher ground. You don't get to ignore the fact that all of this stuff is in your holy book and it's ignorant to do so. If you don't like that then feel free to ignore it when I talk about religion. I don't need any kind of therapy when I'm not the one flying off the handle.
|
Posts: 7580
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:58 pm
Ya right... tell me again that Muslim women cover their faces voluntarily. Women in the muslim culture are possessions and have no rights and do what they are told by the males. Husbands, fathers, brothers. Another reason Canada must never allow Sharia law to be enforced here.
|
Posts: 18770
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 4:12 pm
CanadianJeff CanadianJeff: You should look up ! Tim Chapter 2 if you want to see just a small sample of what Jesus would think on this matter.
Heck considering how rape would result in childbirth.....well I'll leave you to see the consequences of Jesus words seeing as how he didn't condemn rape anywhere in the bible.
You know if one were to make 10 commandments wouldn't you think to put that in there? Even murderers and thieves hate rapists. What exactly does this have to do with the topic? Are you some how saying that the above passage you give is the cause for the Muslim cleric saying what he did? Or are you so lost in your own lil world that you fail to know the difference between Muslim and Christian Holly Books. But now I'll play your game for a bit. What version of the bible are you getting this from and have you researched the Greek orignal text to see what the various translations of the greek words actualy mean and how through the english language sometimes the true meaning of what was written is easily distorted by people be they Atheist or wacko right wing preachers to bizzaro left wing ministers.
|
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:04 pm
New International Version. Or NIV the most common version used by the Catholic church which is the most common Christian denomination. It came off Biblegateway to be specific.
The passage can also be taken from Geek as "she" instead of woman and "restored" instead of saved. For this particular chapter those are the two most common differences in translation.
At which point the ending would read
"But she will be restored through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
Of course this leaves the unanswered question of what of women who never give birth? Are they forever damned by the original sin? Why would god create women who cannot give birth if this was meant to be the method of redemption or restoration?
Just for the record too the whole need to read the original Hebrew thing is just a dodge and always has been. There are translators for a reason who study these things and while knowing how the text varies from version to version is good at the end of the day we need to stick to a few possible interpretations and discuss it or no one will get anywhere.
|
Posts: 42160
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:17 pm
There was no original 'Hebrew'. It was written in Aramaic and Greek. Also, there is no concept of original sin in Judaism. $1: You don't get to ignore the fact that all of this stuff is in your holy book and it's ignorant to do so. My holy book?? Look at my posts, where have I ever stated that I was a 'Christian', or that I believed in a literal meaning in the Bible?? Your whine gets criticized because it flows from a flawed vessel.
|
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:21 pm
yes that's right Jesus also invented Hell so Jews don't believe in that either. I have a lot more respect for them because of it. I still think they are wrong but at least they won't eternally torture you for not believing what they do.
I'm sorry Shep you just always took such high offense that I made an incorrect assumption. I'm sorry.
If your not Christian though why get so offended?
|
Posts: 42160
Posted: Sat Oct 16, 2010 11:46 pm
Do we even know if Jesus lived? You seem ready to place blame on a person who might not even have existed, and even if he did, none of the books in the 'New Testament' were written by him. Everything about him is second or third hand and the creation. Hell, Paul(a well known mysogynist) argued with people who supposedly knew Jesus personally. I take offense to the attitude that since we 'did' it, it's acceptable for them to 'do' it now.
|
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:37 am
I never claimed that it was every acceptable for anyone to do it. I also don't place the blame of Jesus but rather on the whole organization that refuses to give up on him being a real person.
I blame the character of Jesus (thus the use of the name) and his selfish message of demeaning our lives to being nothing more then puppets to worship an invisible emperor with no clothes. ;p
It's this devaluing of human life that makes things like Islamic terrorism and the Inquisition possible. It gives someone a false higher meaning to commit horrible acts. I think all life is precious and it's a vicious evil thing to devalue it with religious practice.
|
Posts: 14139
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:46 am
CanadianJeff CanadianJeff: yes that's right Jesus also invented Hell Say what???? Dude, seriously, if your information is THAT erroneous, I'd suggest leaving Biblical content out of your debating repertoire. The concept of Hell appears in the Bible looooooonnnnngggggg before Jesus shows up.
|
Posts: 4117
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 2:16 am
gonavy47 gonavy47: welcome to Islam. The religion of equality and peace...unless you are a woman. Incorrect statement in this case, as according to the article the majority of the Muslim community in Britain was against it. Making it ones lunatics rambling and not popular belief.
|
|
Page 2 of 4
|
[ 47 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 96 guests |
|
|