(October 5, 2010 at 6:12 pm)pacian Wrote: Rape? A woman is programmed to want to have sex with men who would increase her babies chances of survivability. Being rape destroys the woman's option to choose and thus decreases survivability for that child.
Whut? A woman has a child with a father whom she did not choose. How does that decrease the survivability of the child? Many women bare children from fathers they did not chose. They have no idea who the father is in some cases. Watch Jerry Springer, he showcases bitches like that. There is no decrease in the childrens survivability.
Quote:Even if a child wasn't produced and the woman lived with no decrease to survivability, rape has a negative connotation due to rape leading to murder, injury, and other factors that could decrease survivability.
Of the woman, true. But since you are basing "right" and "wrong" (in a objective stance it seems) on nothing more than survivability of the species, ponder this;
Rapist rapes 20 women. He has increased the survivability of his genetic material 20 times. He has potentially created 20 human beings. He has increased the survivability and increased potential procreation 20 times more than the man who did not.
Using your hypothesis about an objective "right/wrong" based on survivability, shouldn't rape be listed under 'Right'?
That is why this assertion
Quote: That is why raped is perceived as always wrong no matter the context.
is in error. I'm sure with a little thought you could come up with a context or two in which rape would not be perceived as "always wrong".
I used to tell a lot of religious jokes. Not any more, I'm a registered sects offender.
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM