plaetton:


Another funny thing is that the societies where abortion, prostitution and homosexuality are legal are by far predominantly Christian Nations.

Secondly, a simple statistics taken from Nigeria, for example , would show that the far majority of Abortions, prostitution and homosexuality are by people who are Christians or who subscribe to one of our two Abrahamic religions.

So what gives ?

PastorAIO:




…unless question marks

KingEbukasBlog:


This is the worst rebuttal an atheist has ever presented

KingEbukasBlog:


This is the worst rebuttal an atheist has ever presented

plaetton:


That's the problem with these guys.
They seek to define everything only on their own preconceived terms, including your own words.

KingEbukasBlog:


Ok bro thehomer . Kindly hold this popcorn for me while I get the soda from the refrigerator as I await your retrieval of statistics that showed the rate at which victims of rape in Israel committed suicide 3000 yrs ago .

As you can see I brought enough tho

uncle plaetton , PastorAIO , kay17 should join the waiting party .

KingEbukasBlog:


So who /what laid down the moral guide for you ?

Moral guide should from the embodiment of moral good - I imbibed my good morals from studying the life of Christ - the embodiment of moral good - God .

Its easy . Here are three depravities which certain societies now deem lawful

1. Abortion
2. Prostitution
3. Homosexuality

With God's laws as my moral guide , I know that the above are wrong regardless of what the society thinks of it .

Now if you were a citizen of the society that condones this "supposed" depravities , what will be your opinion ? Huh ?

And if you are against the law . What makes your dogmatic stance right or true ?

Kay17:
Abraham's story comes to mind. God instructs him to sacrifice his only son in order to receive continuing divine favours.

Abraham goes ahead blindly to the actual point of killing Isaac. There was no self reflection about the deed other than "God can provide another son". Abraham didn't bother to confirm if it's the Devil misleading him or his mind was muddled in confusion.

In his mind, the act was done. Of course God intervenes timely and praises absolute obedience. Note that Abraham might agree with Zizek that with his God all things are permitted.

PastorAIO:
:



The idea behind the question, I guess, is to suggest that everyone universally considers rape to be evil.

Kay17:
I think morality requires self reflection. The golden rule works when a man ponders the consequences of his actions to others as well as theirs to him. And that man restrains himself from certain actions. Restraint imposed by self reflection is morality not free will or obedience.

PastorAIO:
Yes, really.

Now tell me, what is the difference between Deuteronomy 22:28-29 you quoted where he seized the woman and Exodus 22:16-17 where he seduced the woman? What is the difference between seduction and seizing?

thehomer:


Hey read her own words.



Looks like you're still confused. If you're confused that reasonable people think rape and murder of 6 month old babies is ambiguous, then you have deeper problems.



Keep predicting the future. I won't be surprised that you'll be wrong as usual.

Joshthefirst:
No. The idea, was to suggest to you that in your hopeless and depraved state of moral relativity you have no relevant standard to condemn anything, especially your personal standards, which are insignificant in the evolutionary scheme of things, unless you have power to make your personal standards law.

cloudgoddess:

I genuinely don't think he's capable of processing ideas that deviate from his preconceived notions - which he's set on defending regardless of how ridiculous he makes himself out to be in the process. I've personally given up on engaging him, it's a dead end.

Joshthefirst:
I advise you to hire an English teacher to explain to you the difference between those words and how they apply yo the definition of rape.

PastorAIO:


That is an interesting word to put there. Relevant? Relevant to who? My personal standards are my personal standards.

My personal standards are significant and very relevant to me when I go about my day to day making MY choices in MY life.

What's your point when you say my moral standards are insignificant in the evolutionary scheme of things? Your moral standards have minimum significance in the evolutionary scheme of things too. And everybody else's included your biblical Yahweh. And not just your morality but your entire life!!

What do you want me to do, Kill myself because I don't have the power to make my personal standards law?

The small I can do, I'll do. But I can't kill myself.

sonOfLucifer:
KingEbukasblog, JOshthefirst.. is Truth Eternal? Can Truth Change?

PastorAIO:

...

I take it that you realise that the woman who was seized was raped and that that is a totally different scenario from the woman who was seduced.

Joshthefirst:
Jolly good.

But don't come weeping when someone like hitler actually gets power and following to establish his extreme moral standards and dominate yours completely as a result of your dangerously hypocritical and foolish thinking.

Joshthefirst:
Did you read the link I posted?


Do good to read it.

Kay17:
I think morality requires self reflection. The golden rule works when a man ponders the consequences of his actions to others as well as theirs to him. And that man restrains himself from certain actions. Restraint imposed by self reflection is morality not free will or obedience.

PastorAIO:


I guess it's okay for God to tell his people to rape women because we have no proof that they committed suicide thereafter.




Boaz married Ruth.

David married Bathsheba

Why was this written in Deuteronomy24?

Laws Concerning Divorce
24 “When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and ehe writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house, and she departs out of his house, 2 and if she goes and becomes another man’s wife,

Ignorance with no shame. Yes, very.




Excuse my ignorance with no shame but I believe that the Israelites settled in Canaan and had a very sedentary life. Unless you want to say that the law was given for them only for when they were 40 years in the wilderness.

I don't know how prevalent rape was at the time but the way they mention it in the bible without even batting an eyelid makes me fear for woman kind that lived in those times.

So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan.

The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives. But there were not enough women for all of them. The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel. So the Israelite leaders asked, “How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead? There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever. But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God’s curse.

Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, “Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, ‘Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn’t find enough wives for them when we dest60royed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'” So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.
Judges 21

It sounds pretty damn prevalent to me. Can you see how casually they go about raping and pillaging. I didn't see any deterrence from the Law against Rape. Attacking a city just to get it's virgins. And if it is Mohammed now, you would have opened at least 20 threads on this subject matter alone.

KingEbukasBlog:

dblackninja:




I haven't seen KingEbukasBlog being speechless before- no matter how silly he sounds he always have a reply. See how smoke is emitting from his head - that's what happens when reality sets in

Joshthefirst:
The confused moral relativist doesn't even understand the irrelevant hypocrisy of his own words.

thehomer:


Not true. I know that rape and genocide are bad ideas. You think they are good ideas. Please show me the hypocrisy.

PastorAIO:


Where I think I differ from you is that I make a distinction between Morality and Empathy.

For me, Empathy is the ability to feel the joy and pain of others while Morality is a system of Values with which we esteem the world.

Empathy can be highly esteemed in a moral system, or it can be given low esteem. But Morality is not based on Empathy.

Joshthefirst:
No. The idea, was to suggest to you that in your hopeless and depraved state of moral relativity you have no relevant standard to condemn anything, especially your personal standards, which are insignificant in the evolutionary scheme of things, unless you have power to make your personal standards law.

Kay17:


Empathy is inherently irrational and emotional. It could be false in the sense that you imagine the pain you think another person is going through whereas they aren't.

I agree morality is attached to values, but what is indeed a value is decided by self reflection. If you read Socrates' arguments on morals, you would find him dissecting traditional values and replacing them with others or in other cases, elevating them, with reasoning and self reflection. If it is necessary values are as systematic as possible.

There is this famous Hindu or Vidas passage on duty. A nobleman is on the battlefield, anticipating a battle with his kinsmen and family. And I think Krishna disguises himself as his charioteer, and advises him on the importance of duty. Krishna acts as a conscience, as an inner mouthpiece. At the end of the day, the nobleman satisfied with his inner debate, acts.

I can not remember the names of these characters. Or reference the particular passage.

Can a system of values be created without self consciousness? I doubt it.

PastorAIO:


rebuttal to what? What did I rebut?

dblackninja:




I haven't seen KingEbukasBlog being speechless before- no matter how silly he sounds he always have a reply. See how smoke is emitting from his head - that's what happens when reality sets in