RE: Rape in the Bible
December 8, 2014 at 12:34 pm
(This post was last modified: December 8, 2014 at 12:34 pm by FatAndFaithless.)
(December 8, 2014 at 12:32 pm)alpha male Wrote:(December 8, 2014 at 12:25 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Well, we are told that homosexual sex is an abomination deserving of death, and sodomy (hence the name of the term...) was certainly going on there. It wasn't "merely" about gay sex, since God has a whole host of meaningless shit he gets hissy about, but if we're talking about sex and rape here, then yes, the gay sex must've been a part of the judgement by defintion, if it's actually an abomination.Yes, it may have been part of it, but again, as other cities presumably with gay sex weren't destroyed, there was more being judged in the case of Sodom, and gang rape seems like it was a component.
Quote:As for your moral question. No, I don't know with epistemological certainty that my moral ideas are objectively correct, nor do you.Bingo.
Quote:However, we do try to base our morals on reality, and there are copious data to demonstrate why rape is morally abhorrent (psychologically, physically, socially, etc), but absolutely none to justify some of the "moral" pronouncements of your God (such as gay sex being an abomination).Here you're appealing to the harm principle, and selection of it as a moral framework is likewise your subjective choice.
There is no code written in stone upon which for use to stumble. Of course the framework for our moral systems are chosen by us. The difference is the framework putting human wellbeing as the most important principle is demonstrably more effective at creating functioning, safe, stable, and efficient societies than a moral code constructed on flat assertions by some unassailable dictator that may or may not having any bearing on reality in any way.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson