ihedinobi2:
I don't watch the program. But it does sound like entrapment. How are we to know that those car thieves would have been car thieves if there were no cars to steal?

Caracta:

No I don't. But like I said, I'm yet to see situations like that. I mean real-life situation from the victim herself. Where a girl (with all her senses intact) removed all her clothes and walked into the den of rapîsts.

Mynd44:
Even if a girl removed her clothes and walked into a group of men, how can she be have caused her rape? She committed public display of nudity, the men should not take law in their hands.

ihedinobi2:

You clearly missed the point in that post. The question is whether it is out of order to consider the circumstances of a crime in passing a sentence not whether ignorance is an issue. Ignorance was named only as an example of an excuse, if you will.

UjSizzle: Once upon a time, women used to walk around naked and that wasn't a bug deal. Then one day, an Ad campaign manager decides to sexualize these beautiful creatures just because they'll probably help sell more useless products. Next as the world evolved some more, some people thought it wise to have their brain degenerate back to the years when molesting women was a victory sports of sort, only this time it's really just to satisfy their lustful desires(because come on I don't see anybody fighting a war today )

Now women can't afford to dress up without being looked at as an object.
They are told not to leave their drinks unattended to because some perv out there could spike it and have his way with her.
She's to be ever mindful of waking up the animal in every man she comes in contact with.
Don't wink. Don't smile. Don't touch. Don't breath. Anything could be deemed provocative. In fact, don't live.

You know what, I don't see prostitutes getting molested. What i do see is innocent bystanders hijacked and molested for the most stupid reasons; even people who are properly covered up in countries like India!
I don't know when we got to point where certain atrocities are deemed OK. Some stupid article i read even went to suggest râpe could be men's natural instinct to ensure survival of their gene pool at work(very much like chickens).

*sighs* Mynd and Caracta, you two need to stop making me see threads like this.

ihedinobi2:

Right. And all men are saints abi?

Mynd44:
Grab a law book dude, there is nothing entrapning in the issue, fact is you saw a car belonging to someone else and you stole it. The same way the person would have done if the car belonged to an innocent citizen.

Yet in that same show, some people simply lock the car and hang on to the keys, some drive it to the police station, some to a parking lot and report and some just walk away.

Being a criminal or not being one is a choice, just like when the Bibles, I put to you life or death....

ihedinobi2:

Feel free to demonstrate how this thread makes räpe ok in any way and under any circumstance.

Mynd44:
Here is another instance...

I had a bag full of money, it was for payment for my contractors who will be coming to my house early in the morning bo I had to make a late withdrawal as I will travel on the morrow.

On my way through Aba, some "nice" gentle men say that a zipper was opened in the bag and saw the money then relieved me of my "load".

Start considering the circumstances

UjSizzle:
Ok. Will the word 'excusable' do it for you?

ihedinobi2:
You could quote any law book you like. Nothing stopping you.

Indeed, you can make it open-shut. But let's not be intellectually lazy. Let's consider the merits of each action and each peculiar case and make certain that each one is good and right.

Atheists, for whom you have demonstrated some sympathy, have said that it is God's fault that Adam sinned in the Garden by allowing him to face temptation at all. If there is never a test, you can never truly tell the quality of a thing. That is self-evident. Those particular car thieves may or may never have stolen a car if someone did not in that particular moment decide to entice them with an unsecured one.

That does not mean that stealing a car will ever be OK.

Mynd44: Ujsizzle, I am sorry we bring you here but I just can't deny a good thread when I see one. Especially one that tells me I can jack my landlord's daughter and still blame her for it. Just divine

ihedinobi2:

Did you deliberately open the zipper?

Mynd44:
Now you are being interlectualy lazy.....

God Gave Adam a choice. He could have chosen to obey God and not eat. He could have walked away and go enjoy the other fruits in the garden right? But he chose to sin so he was punished for it.

I guess you can also blame God in this case and say Adam was entrapped right?

ihedinobi2:

Did you deliberately open the zipper?

Mynd44: Bleep being a moderator or supermoderator, you are SICK!!

UjSizzle:
This back and forth is just tiring sha. You won't budge. Ihe won't budge. You two are as stubborn as mules. Why do you argue again?

UjSizzle:
This back and forth is just tiring sha. You won't budge. Ihe won't budge. You two are as stubborn as mules. Why do you argue again?

ihedinobi2:

I agree with choice. Adam had a choice. The car thief has a choice, entrapment or no. The räpist had a choice. So does the victim of räpe, don't you agree?

Mynd44:
A zipper was opened. Delibrately or not. Does it excuse their robbing me?

UjSizzle:
Does this mean we're back to intent?

TheBigUrban2: lol.


The op of this thread is wrong.


this victim blaming mentality is dangerous.

Women being called "sluts" because they get molested.



"you were molested because of your dressing..you enticed the man"


Nonsense

Mynd44:
I would have left him to his rantings if he was doing it in private and not a site where kids also visit.

I wouldn't want my niece mollested cos some nutcase saw a thread on NL open by another nutcase

ihedinobi2:
Again, I don't know if you mean "excuse" as in render them completely inculpable or "excuse" as in alleviate their blame for their crime.

Robbing you won't be right even if you sewed a suit out of the cash and wore it into their house. The only adjustments here are whether you share blame for your predicament or not. Would you be.wrong to be careless with your own treasures in an unsafe place?

Mynd44:
I would have left him to his rantings if he was doing it in private and not a site where kids also visit.

I wouldn't want my niece mollested cos some nutcase saw a thread on NL open by another nutcase

Mynd44:
God also had a choice. Not to put the tree there in the first place

Mynd44:
Back to the issues of an unsecure car.

A girl was mollested cos she wore something a whole lot of guys saw and took away their eyes. Some even saw the girl as ugly and there is this nutcase who saw her and got turned on and he violated her.

Pray tell, how is it her fault?

UjSizzle:
Be nice

vickyO: No way, Ihe. Come on. How would you blame a victim for a crime as gruesome as rape?

When did self control become a thing of the past? You're a Christian, Jesus really won't be pleased with this.

Why? Cause he said mere looking at a woman lustfully qualifies you for an eternity in hell as it is akin to fornication.

I wonder what he'd say about rape.

ihedinobi2:

Sis, there is one thing that is easy to mix up here. It is that the victim's culpability lessens the perpetrator's responsibility somehow. And I admit that it can be hard to maintain a separation of the two (my comments thus far will evince my own difficulty in doing so).

But this is true: the fact that a person does something that makes it more likely that someone else should harm them in some way will never take away or even reduce the fact that the "someone else" has a responsibility not to harm them no matter what the provocation.

This thread is actually not driving at lessening the filthiness and wickedness of räpe. It is aimed at sensitizing potential victims to their God-given responsibility to maintain their security. A woman who is careless about her allure will not stand blameless before God for the sin of the râpe which she suffers. And if she does not suffer räpe, every man who was tempted will be her responsibility before God. Do you consider this unjust?

I will anticipate the claim that a woman can never by her dressing prevent a räpist. If a woman is in the privacy of her home even nakêd with no exposure to the outside world were to be râped, she cannot be blamed at all within that context. If her own conscience blames her, she needs to reassess her understanding of moral imperatives. There are räpists indeed whether there is temptation or no, but a woman need not give them any kind of excuse. And there are excuses to give, that is the point of this thread.