www.boards.straightdope.com

Whynot #fundie boards.straightdope.com

And, while we're at it, why don't we stop teaching women that the worst thing that could ever happen to them, worse than death itself, is to be raped?

I mean, I've been there, and granted, it ain't fun. But it's also not the end of the world. There's less physical damage and risk of death with a garden variety rape than to a gunshot wound. The only reason there's more psychological trauma to rape than to mugging is because we teach girls they're "ruined" if they're raped. We work them into a state of hysteria because they've been irreparably violated and tell them they're going to be fucked up for years because of this. It's total patriarchal women-as-property antiquated bullshit. It's root is the exact same female oppression mentality which leads fathers to kill their daughters after rape because they've disgraced the family.

DrDeth #fundie boards.straightdope.com


Being sexually attracted to 16yo girls is not a Perversion. It's illegal to act on, yes, and it should be, but it doesnt mean you're a pervert. Let me put it this way: you are at a bank. You see a bank employee wheel a cart loaded with cash into the vault. Are you a sicko pervert if yu think "Man, I'd like to get my hands on that cash?" No. What's wrong is when you act on it. 16 yo girls are sexually mature. Some few are even mentally mature. You can even marry one perfectly legally in many states. But you cant have sex with one outside of marriage. If a 21yo man marries a 16 yo girl legally, is he some sort of pervert for consummating the marriage during the honeymoon?

Now, being a true pedophile is being a sick pervert. That's being attracted to a person who is not sexualy mature.

DrDeth #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Well- of course- the MAKING of hard-core child porn is harmful to the child, and is a heinous crime.

But then after that you get into waters where things aren't as clear. If the "kiddie porn" only involves nudity- no actual sex- it that harmful to the child? Some would say it's just our Victorian prudishness that says "the naked body is an obcene thing", an dthat "nudity is a natural and good thing".

I know one can argue that buying kiddy porn aids ands abets the person who makes it, who possibly wouldn't make it except for the chance someone would buy it. But since there were penty of sites where perverts would download for free their "work", it seems like a lot of the current kiddie porn swirling around out there isn't commercial in it's original purpose. Then again- if one doesn't buy it, but just looks at it- it's going to be hard to say that that hurts the child who was the victim.

It has been hotly debated- even here- whther or not simple "possession" of "kiddy" porn should be such a serious crime.

Note- I am not advocating "free kiddie porn"- I am just playing the "Devils Advocate" and pointing out that not all agree that "child pornography is a bad thing". It's a complex moral subject, not a simplistic one.

MrDibble #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Ferchrissakes, if he'd given us his word that he was a stamp collector, no one would give a shit. But, "I really want to have sex with children," is not something that rational people will just shine on. And most normal people wouldn't count that as an asset on a baby-sitter's application form either


I didn't say he'd be my first choice of babysitter, but I don't see paedophilia as necessarily an automatic disqualifier anymore than being a bestialist means you can't look after my dog. What I said was if he was a friend of mine (like all my other sitters) and I knew he was an out paedophile, I would still let him look after my kid. Because, call me crazy, but I trust my friends not to hurt my kid (or they wouldn't be my friend), and anyway, I trust people not to act on their every impulse at any opportunity.

Y'all are treating him like he'd be a junkie in a room full of drugs. I'd treat him like a person with a particular attraction in a situation where that's not particularly relevant to the job at hand. IOW, I'd expect a modicum of self control from him, just like I'd trust a gay friend who thought I was hot (of which I have had a couple) not to take advantage of me when I'm drunk, or a straight friend not to try and peek at my wife changing her clothes. You know - civilized behaviour?

Happy Clam #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Superman and Lois having sex is most definitely bestiality, at the very least (it would be more "natural" for Lois to get it on with a frog or beetle, even). Plus, consider that Supes has died at least once, and very publicly, at that: half the DC universe attended his funeral! Thus we are faced with perhaps the most important question of our generation: is Lois Lane a secret necrophilia buff?

Kalhoun #fundie boards.straightdope.com

on a woman named jenny who raped a comatose man


I'm not sure you can call it rape, per se, if the person isn't wielding the humiliation or soul-crushing dominance (neither of which were intended by Jenny) a rapist inflicts on his victim. There was no anger here. As I recall he was a complete vegetable. He was no longer even "arp"-ing, was he? I'm not saying that I think people are free to go around having sex with the mentally retarded or damaged. But I'm also not sure that "rape" is what we should call this particular act.

bengangmo #fundie boards.straightdope.com

1. Of course for violent / forced rape father's rights are terminated (going by layman's terms of forced / violent - I know that by definition, rape is forced)
2. If the lady is found to have raped the man, her rights should be terminated
3. If it is not so clear cut (statutory rape of a 17yr old for example) then it needs to be taken on a case by case basis
4. If it is (non violent) date rape or rape of a drunk (but not comatose) woman, there is nothing that would automatically make me assume the father is not fit to be a daddy (although the cards would be stacked against him, and he would need to prove himself fit)

gasopode #fundie boards.straightdope.com

[What is your take on this scenario from real life:

Someone is staying in a friend's home. They have no reason to believe the friend is sexually interested in them. The friend gets chemically incapacitated to the point of passing out on the couch. The houseguest then has sex with the unconscious person, who doesn't say no.

Is it rape? Who is to blame?]


You'd have to be a complete bastard to do it, but IMO it's not rape. No more than my carrying an incapacitated freind home is kidnap. I've done some pretty stupid things while Brahms but I never suggested that anyone else was responsible. I accept that if I'm no longer able to take acre of myself I am at risk, I take that risk.

Ultravires #fundie boards.straightdope.com

on legalizing prostitution


I'm still confused by the two sides of the argument about the rape question. I have understood that rape is punished FAR in excess of battery or aggravated battery because of the special place we have for the rights of a woman and her chastity.

Now, if a woman is on record as simply offering her body for money, any idea of a special protection for sex goes out the window, and posters in this thread readily admit that selling sex is not morally different from selling hamburgers.

But in the same scheme, why should we keep the heightened protections for rape when the transaction falls apart? If sex is not special and a woman has regularly consented to vaginal penetration for money by strangers, why when one particular stranger's transaction falls apart should the prostitute be protected by a law designed to protect the Virgin Mary?

I don't see how it can be both ways. Either prostitution should be illegal (or at least considered legal but with a stigma attached) and rape laws enforced or prostitution should be treated like selling anything else with a violation of the terms of that contract treated like everything else.

If I don't pay my water bill, I don't get 25 to life in prison..

[[Your last point would indicate that rape is treated as a lesser crime when the victim is a 'slut' than when she married her high school sweet hart. Is this the case in the US? Are damages/prison terms determined by the sexual past of the victim?]]


Any other crime is treated this way. Some are even codified into law. In Florida, a battery against a person over age 65 is punished more severely than a battery against someone younger.

I think were it not for the politicization of the issue, we could all agree that a prostitute would feel less damage from a rape than would a nun. We can't say that in polite society, though, so we pretend its all the same.

bozuit #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Maybe I'm just ignorant on the subject (a real possibility) but I fail to see how your spouse having sex with you when you don't give consent is necessarily a problem. That's not to say I don't believe marital rape exists, but if you've had sex with someone a thousand times before, have a normal sex life with them, etc., I don't see how "surprise sex" needs to be rape, in the sense that at worst it would be an annoyance for the person being woken up by a horny spouse, not a traumatic experience.

ultravires #fundie boards.straightdope.com

I think the analogy to the surgeon and unconscious patient is a good one. It's not battery because it is assumed that the unconscious person would consent to treatment which would help him survive and a reasonable surgeon would operate.

In a marriage, or a relationship, if a party protests that he/she was asleep and didn't give consent, the right approach, IMHO, is for the jury to hear evidence on the prior state of the relationship and whether it was reasonable for the instigator to have assumed that consent was granted prior.

Any other construction leads to absurdities such that we all either know of people (or are guilty ourselves) of rape and are therefore sex offenders who need to do time in prison. It is a normal part of many relationships, and I question the real world implications that a "zero tolerance" policy that some are advocating would have on normal, reasonable people.

Why is it only sex that prior consent is invalid according to this thought? If I tell a neighbor that he is free to come in my house and get a drink from the fridge, does he have to ask me every time to not be guilty of trespass?

js_africanus #fundie boards.straightdope.com

[on the subject on spiking someone's drink with a love potion]
>>No, sorry, it's still a violation in my opinion.


And you opinion is based on what, exactly? It is a magic potion where by definition the target's free will is altered such that the target falls madly for the user.

Quote:
>>If I steal your car and, in the process make you forget you ever had a car, I've still got a car and you don't.

That may be the case; however, the example is in no way analogous to the question at hand. If I have a potion that makes you want to give your car to me, then you obtain what you desire and I obtain what I desire. The potion changes your preferences. A love potion is not a form of supernatural coercion; a love potion is a way to magically re-organize the universe so that the object of your desire loves you madly & truly.

The seducer does not leave a broken person behind, but one who is better off for the seduction, and glad that it happened.

The target of the love potion is going through life with all the failed relationships and lost loves that cause the rest of us so much pain. The love potion takes that away and gives the target True Love in a manner the rest of us can only hope for, but will never obtain. If you fall in love with a person, does it matter whether it was her personality, her humor, or her superfine ass? Would it matter if it was a potion? No! Because to say that it did matter, you would be violating the condition of the hypothetical.

I say yes, I'd use it;

Surreal #fundie boards.straightdope.com

How Is A 'Wet Willy' So Different From Rape?

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term, a 'wet willy' is a procedure typically performed by children whereby the perpetrator sneaks up behind the victim, moistens his or her pinky fingers by licking them, then proceeds to shove them into the victim's ears.

So here we have a procedure that involves the use of an appendage to perform forcible penetration of up to 2 orifices, accompanied by a transference of bodily fluids-- exactly what you would have with rape.

But even though these 2 concepts are essentially identical, our society has a vastly different perception of them. One thing is viewed as the worst thing you can possibly do to a person short of killing them, while the other is viewed a harmless joke that school children play on one another.

I know some of you will try to argue that rape is inherently different because it carries the risk of pregnancy. But would these people contend that a woman who is post-menopausal who gets raped is getting no more than a wet willy? I doubt it. Besides, the pregnancy risk can be eliminated by taking emergency contraceptive within 72 hours of the event.

Others would argue that rape is much worse because of the disease potential. But would these people say that the rape is no big deal if a condom was used, or if the victim didn't get any diseases?

So exactly what is the logic behind the vast difference in our society's perceptions of the criminality and victimization level between a rape and a wet willy? Which level of response would be appropriate in order to be consistent-- should we treat wet willy victims like we do rape victims, or should we treat rape victims like we do wet willy victims??

Several Jehovah's Witnesses #fundie boards.straightdope.com

[Post written by Annie-Xmas]

My Jehovah's Witnesses story turned me off them forever:

My sister the lesbian has one biological daughter, who is a devout JW. My sister and her partner were in a terrible car crash in California and she needed a blood transfusion. Her partner didn't have the authority to approve it. Her daughter, the devout JW, runs to the hospital and denies permission. The hospital calls me, faxes me the papers in New Jersey, I sign them and fax them back, and the transfusion is approved.

I am a raving maniac over the whole thing, very worried about my sister. Fifteen minutes later two JW's come into my office and start lecturing me about how I doomed my sister the lesiban with a blood transfusion.

I gave it to them with both barrels. I told them if they ever came into my place of business with their shitty religion again, I would call the cops and file a lawsuit. I told them I was not a believer of any religion that would let people die rather than receiving medical treatment. I told them my sister was a devout lesbian and wasn't going to convert.

They told me they hoped my sister got hepatitus from the transfusion and left.

[Bolding mine]

Susanann #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Executions only take a lot of time and resources today, because there are so few of them today.

In the old days, executions were carried out fairly quickly, cheaply, and took very little resources.

After we execute the first 10 or 20 thousand women and doctors, the executions will go quite smoothly and quickly.

I dont know if the number of abortions will decrease(except in the cases of repeat offendors- there wont be any), that is speculation, but if fewer women have abortions because of the death penalty, if more women choose to use birth control, then all the better.

The war on drugs takes a lot of time and resources because we dont execute offendors. You cant compare apples and oranges. Not the same thing.

Bible Man #fundie boards.straightdope.com

[On the collection of all factual material that exists]

Yes, all facts come from a special collection of 66 books written by 40 different authors who wrote over a period of 1500 years.

[on ignoring pesky facts that get in the way of his view of the Bible]

no one except Bible believers knows when the sun was actually formed

[bearing false witness in regard to current evolutionary theory with bonus smarmy attitude]

Microevolution: the beaks of succeeding generations of finches will adapt to their environmental conditions.
Macroevolution: Frogs will eventually sprout wings and fly away, monkeys will all turn into men, and given enough time and chance that chair you're sitting in will eventually get up and walk out of the room.
The first type has happened on a daily basis since creation. The second type has never happened and never will. Further, if all species had been formed this way as the theory postulates, there would be massive evidence for it literally at our feet - there is none. It's a hopelessly bankrupt theory while ironically, anyone who believes it might actually be the only slim chance to validate it - obviously having somewhat less evolved reasoning powers.

[On where he gets his belief that his interpretation is, well, Gospel]

Jesus again told me that all your bizarre personal beliefs about the Bible are also false and come from listening to the doctrines of demons. The spirit you are listening to is not the Holy Spirit but a lying spirit, and to claim otherwise is blasphemy on your part.

Nomadic_One #fundie boards.straightdope.com

To an evolutionist, the idea that an almighty God created everything is pure foolishness. And don’t take kindly to those who don’t fall for their imagination. Just look at evolution’s prevalence in places where people claim to be learned.

Susanann #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Abortion is murder, the penalties should be the same regardless of the age of the vicitim. As far as leaving the country, those people get off scott free, as they do for any other crime which is a crime here, but not there. Those who 'assist' in murder(doctors, nurses, receptionists, owners of the clinic, parents, boyfriends, etc), should get the same penalties as those who assist in any other murder - the death penalty or life in prison.

Susanann #fundie boards.straightdope.com

I definitely prefer execution [as a punishment for abortion], because the cost of imprisoning 30 million baby murderers for life, would be in the trillions of dollars. Perhaps many states who dont have the death penalty, would change and reinstate the death penalty under the staggering costs of imprisoning so many doctors, nurses, and women.

Seethruart #fundie boards.straightdope.com

I believe you are the one making false claims (should I be suprised?). Where have I said anything about imaginary little people? Nowhere have I mentioned that. I suppose you imagined it, like you imagine the Apollo missions landed on the moon I claim the moon landings were faked, and I am backing that up with solid photographic evidence. I have made no false claims. The only false claims are made by NASA and the US Government. As far as your bogus scientific theories go....you can stuff them.

His4ever #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Thanks for the link to the new chick tract. I liked it. I'm getting low, will probably order it next time I send in an order. Don't think you guys are getting the real message here. You prefer to make fun and analyze to death but the plain truth is that anyone not knowing Christ as Savior will go to the lake of fire. It's in the Word, for those who happen to believe what God says about it. That's all I have to say.

His4ever #fundie boards.straightdope.com

[To people who've had Near Death Experiences in which angels told them you only need to be fairly good to get to Heaven]

Of course, you've already told me that you will never consider my beliefs to be truth. It really saddens me to see you deceived in this way by these "beings of light" and "spirit guides". They give you these wonderful feelings of love love love and make you feel good so you believe whatever they tell you. It's even sadder that people will read the things you say and believe them without seeing what God has to say about it. But, then, that doesn't matter to you either because I remember you told me that the Bible isn't the authority for your life. I've said this to NDEers before and I'll say it again. Any being of light you see in an NDE that tells you anything that contradicts the word of God, does not come from Him but is a deceiving, lying spirit. The reason? To get you to think that you're okay, you're going to heaven no matter what so there's nothing for you to do. You can ignore most of that stuffy old Bible just practive love love love. You don't need Christ. That is an out and out lie, Lekatt! If you refuse to accept the Way that God has provided for you (and that Way is Jesus Christ and His death for you) I can tell you on the authority of God's word that you'll never ever see heaven. I pray your eyes will be opened one day, sir, before it's too late.

His4ever #fundie boards.straightdope.com

Deception is satan's goal and I'm sure he just loves keeping people confused as to what the truth is. Why do we see so many attacks on God's word today? Because satan hates the truth and us and will do anything to deceive us, including sending one of the fallen angens (demons) to appear to someone as a beautiful angel from heaven to start a false religion.

Steve Wright #fundie boards.straightdope.com

As for what's called physical evil - natural disasters and the like - well, these things can be avoided or prevented if we come to a better understanding of God and His Creation. (Including, of course, the natural laws governing that Creation. I think it's part of my Christian duty to have faith and practice the scientific method.) So, the answer to the question 'Why doesn't God do something about physical evil in the world?" is "He did; He made us.'

Next page