Why does god want to cut off women's hands?

[Ryantology]

The same could be said of jail time. What's the difference?

The fact that jail is punitive rather than preventative demonstrates that flawed beings sometimes have no choice but to invent flawed solutions to problems. The fact that there's no difference demonstrates that God's law is a flawed solution invented by flawed beings.

It doesn't. As noted, eye for an eye. A man damaging another man's junk would have his own junk damaged - a worse fate than losing a hand IMHO.

Again, damaging the genitals isn't required. Merely seizing them puts a lady down one hand.

[Brakeman]

Are you reading the bible and just posting the nonsense as you find them?

More from memory, but I post it just to let the theists squirm and show the forum just how much stretching, twisting and bending is required to create their apologia.

[Minimalist]

Are you reading the bible and just posting the nonsense as you find them?

That could be a lifelong endeavor!

[Captain Colostomy]

Also, why do you phrase it as god wanting to cut off hands, rather than god wanting to prevent damage to men's junk? Do you say that societies with prisons want to put people in jail, or that they want to deter crime?

Shouldn't there be a law that cuts off men's hands who touch women's breasts, when two of them are fighting?

Screw that! I have (attempted) breaking up cat fights before. With this a law, I would be walking around with nubs now! :p

[Minimalist]

Also, why do you phrase it as god wanting to cut off hands, rather than god wanting to prevent damage to men's junk? Do you say that societies with prisons want to put people in jail, or that they want to deter crime?

Prisons do not deter crime.

We have a prison-industrial complex that does in fact want to put people in jail and makes up bullshit crimes to maintain their profitability.

[Brakeman]

It doesn't. As noted, eye for an eye. A man damaging another man's junk would have his own junk damaged - a worse fate than losing a hand IMHO.

Only, it doesn't say that does it? No, there is no place in the bible where it says that if a man grabs hold of your junk he is to be punished by having his junk cut off or seized, without pity.

It's not there now is it???

[John V]

The fact that jail is punitive rather than preventative demonstrates that flawed beings sometimes have no choice but to invent flawed solutions to problems. The fact that there's no difference demonstrates that God's law is a flawed solution invented by flawed beings.

So, as you consider jail to be punitive, do you say that societies want to put people in jail?

Again, damaging the genitals isn't required. Merely seizing them puts a lady down one hand.

The context of the fight indicates that her intent is to injure, not fondle.

---

Only, it doesn't say that does it? No, there is no place in the bible where it says that if a man grabs hold of your junk he is to be punished by having his junk cut off or seized, without pity.

It's not there now is it???

Yes, it is there.

Lev 24
19 If a man causes disfigurement of his neighbor, as he has done, so shall it be done to him.

[Ryantology]

So, as you consider jail to be punitive, do you say that societies want to put people in jail?

There are always motives for wanting to put people in jail, political and financial gain being among the most popular, so yes, that is true in many cases.

God's law should be held to a higher standard than our imperfect systems, but it is only the atheist who ever does so.

The context of the fight indicates that her intent is to injure, not fondle.

Unless the result is ripping the sack clean off, then it remains disproportionate to remove a hand.

19 If a man causes disfigurement of his neighbor, as he has done, so shall it be done to him.

Men are punished only if disfigurement is actually caused. Women are punished if disfigurement is a possibility.

[max-greece]

The fact that jail is punitive rather than preventative demonstrates that flawed beings sometimes have no choice but to invent flawed solutions to problems. The fact that there's no difference demonstrates that God's law is a flawed solution invented by flawed beings.

So, as you consider jail to be punitive, do you say that societies want to put people in jail?

Again, damaging the genitals isn't required. Merely seizing them puts a lady down one hand.

The context of the fight indicates that her intent is to injure, not fondle.

---

Only, it doesn't say that does it? No, there is no place in the bible where it says that if a man grabs hold of your junk he is to be punished by having his junk cut off or seized, without pity.

It's not there now is it???

Yes, it is there.

Lev 24
19 If a man causes disfigurement of his neighbor, as he has done, so shall it be done to him.

Now deep down you must know that if this was a quote from the Quoran as opposed to the Bible you would condemn it as vehemently as we are doing.

It just never ceases to amaze me how religious people leap to the defence of the indefensible.

[John V]

There are always motives for wanting to put people in jail, political and financial gain being among the most popular, so yes, that is true in many cases.

I disagree. I don't think that most societies want to put people in jail, but rather they'd prefer their citizens to be law-abiding.

God's law should be held to a higher standard than our imperfect systems, but it is only the atheist who ever does so.

For all you know, the statute in question was completely effective as a preventative, and never needed to be enforced.

Unless the result is ripping the sack clean off, then it remains disproportionate to remove a hand.

If the result is loss of reproductive ability for the man, then loss of a hand is a disproportionately light sentence.

Men are punished only if disfigurement is actually caused. Women are punished if disfigurement is a possibility.

And a woman's maximum punishment is less than that of a man's in this case. It's a compromise.

---

Now deep down you must know that if this was a quote from the Quoran as opposed to the Bible you would condemn it as vehemently as we are doing.

It just never ceases to amaze me how religious people leap to the defence of the indefensible.

I find it indefensible to argue that criminals should get off easier than their victims. Go figure.