How stupid do you have to be?...

[Esquilax]

are you intintionally being obstinate or are you not reading what is being said? Why rape a girl for 50 shekels when you can legally 'buy' a wife for a few shekels and live stock?

Because- and I need you to concentrate here- rape isn't always committed after careful consideration. People do it in the heat of the moment. Insane people do it. Criminals with no care for pros and cons do it. It still gets done, no matter the penalty. All this system does is ensure that when it does happen, whatever violent, crazy scum that does it, the poor victim is shackled to him for life.

Again morality is a meaningless standard.

You said it, not me.

proof? Link? no of course not, just the obligatory move to dismissale based on your word.

Oh, you mean like "morality is a meaningless standard?"

Anyway, here. One upping you, yet again.

To what end? Why would he want to keep her? If he wanted her or could afford to have her why not just pay what her father wanted in the first place?

Maybe he thought he could get away but didn't. Maybe he's crazy; remember, there's not any knowledge of mental illness back then. Maybe he's a sadist who cares more about the suffering of the woman than the consequences on him. Maybe once he gets caught he figures he'd at least make the best of a bad situation by intimidating his new wife into submission.

Are these the kinds of people you'd want to shackle a woman to?

This is how every bigotted man starts out in justifying his position over that of another or in this case thousands of years of a given soceity and millions if not billions of people.

The difference being, of course, that in this case I'm not talking about the entire race, but about the rapists and slavers among them. And again, go fuck yourself.

Your not even the first person to ask this.

again my recourses are limited to what the soceitial rules allow me in the way of a response. If he time traveled here he would be put in jail, If I time traveled there I'd take the money.

So would you if you were to be a law abiding citizen.

So funny how your concepts of the social responsibilities of these people disappears the moment it affects you. So it turns out there are some situations where you'd hold them to the correct standard; I guess they're not so incapable of it after all.

In today's soceity your right. in that one your wrong.

I reject the notion of entirely subjective morality. There are a number of things that are just bad, in that they never serve the collective wellbeing of mankind. Rape and slavery being two of those.

Just so you know i could call you all sorts of name questioning your intellegence here. Because you are obviously talking about a soceity you have spent very little time learning about.

Which is a meaningless objection in this case, because there's no context in which the sale of another human being becomes okay.

compared to what standard? we are discussing a culture that existed almost 4000 years ago. Wake up, no culture mirrored this one 4000 years ago. Your compareing apples and oranges.

Compared to the standard. Again, cultural context doesn't matter here.

Why would a father have is raped daughter then marry a slave to pay the debt her raper owed?
(do some reading before you answer or i will rip into you this time.)

Why is it you think any of this excuses the central immorality at play here?

so you think peer pressure will get me to change my mind?

No, I don't think anything, including reality, would ever change your mind. I just want you to know exactly how we all see you, when you continue down your arrogant little path.

Uh, no, here is why: I have seperated the two soceities being compared and honestly looked at them without feeling or judgement and have decided if the roles were reversed and each soceity took on the resources of the other, they would eventually mirror the one they replaced.

You mean, you leap to the defense of your holy book and the shit in it, and then cloak it in this charade of having dispassionately looked over the facts.

your appeal to emotion and your sense of right is just plain near sighted ignorance. You have done nothing but point at people who lived 4000 years ago and say your better. Now do-mas ask yourself why. If your honest you would admit it has nothing to do with you, but the circumstances you live in.

No, because for one, I can think of an alternative, within the means of these people, and that's to not force the woman to marry her rapist.

Oh, by the way, I'm also taking this in context; isn't it funny that the punishment for almost everything but rape in the bible is death? Think about that.

lol. again you do not understand the culture. Being a 'misogynistic' culture women (ones men back then wanted to rape) were virgins and they were kept under lock and key. one's only access to a girl like that would have been through the courtship process.

Kinda no sex test drive to see if you wanted to haggle out a deal. On these 'dates' would be when a girl would be raped.

Are you seriously that stupid that you've never heard of a home invasion? Or any context beyond the one you're intent on portraying?

It's only indefensable if you are not willing to look beyond the culture you grew up in and feel comfortable with.

If there was a culture today, in a third world country, where this happened, would you be okay with it?

Actually it's not. It's anti reperations for rape. Not once have you denounced rape.

Oh, so every time I called the rapists involved criminals, and monsters, that doesn't count? My generally disgusted tone with you for defending this shit doesn't count?

You're a fucking idiot, Drich.

Only the payment of rape. Even if you had you have not supported any possiable deturrants to rape in that time, no supported any of the deturrants the bible provides for. Don't lie to yourself and try and take the high road, all youve done here is condemn Jews for doing their best to prevent rape.

I submit to you that their best could easily have involved taking out that "she marries her rapist" thing at no cost to anyone, which puts it in line with your little shtick here.

But they didn't.

Wow, at the self righteousness.

Yeah, it's usually you acting like that! Good thing I employ it when it matters, huh?

again not once have you said anything that seperates you from the conditioning your soceity has indoctrinated you with, which means your not one to 'think for yourself.' your a sheep and you follow the flock. your self righteous rant proves this fact. Which means if you were born in Hitlers germany you'd be goose stepping jews into death camps, or if you were an OT jew you would do whatever your soceity told you was right.
You in yourself righteousness, and the veil of obliviousness you have pulled over your own eyes turns my stomach, so I guess we are even.

You're... you're actually godwinning me? Good lord, you must really not have an argument if the best you can do is baseless blind firing. How about you drink a nice big cup of shut the fuck up, and come back once you've pulled up your big boy pants, put down your baby foo foo, and thought of a real argument, hmm?

Oh wait, there aren't any for your position, I forgot.

Straw Man.

Your argument.

WHEN a man raped a woman, how do you suggest that soceity should have handeled it 4000 years ago?

By not forcing his victim to spend the rest of her life with him.

Remember no jail, no lawyers, no social infrastructure at all. And please it must be something viable or i will call you out as a dumbass. Show me something that would have work in the existing laws place.

By not forcing his victim to spend the rest of her life with him.

Oh, and again, at no point have you ever considered the woman's feelings. Pretty interesting look at your headspace, there.

Look, in the end, you're failing to understand the basic concept: I don't care what culture they happened to be in, nor the means at their disposal. There's no reason to make the woman marry her rapist, nor any reason to resort to slavery. Especially not when the rest of the law functions on this eye for an eye, death penalty for every other crime stuff.

I guess I don't really care if you think I'm preachy for thinking that way. I'd rather be preachy than having to be an apologist for slavery and the sale of women. I don't think I'm alone in that; why do you think nobody else has come to your defense, here?

Why do you think everyone's taking my position too?