Consensual sex? Or rape by deception.. A disturbing case..
- Thread starter Bells
- Start date
Or "If I told you the actual truth you probably wouldn't shag me, so pretend I'm desirable & single. And I'll do you the same courtesy".
Should suffice for most Saturday nights in the UK.
You look pretty after a few pints should do just as well!
This is fertile ground for honesty in relationships [even of the wham! bam! thank you ma'am! variety]. Maybe silicon breasts should come with a stamped warning, "silicon valley ahead"
Pshaw, I referred to that here:You look pretty after a few pints should do just as well!
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588524&postcount=19
Honesty?
"I've had too much to drink and I'm up for a mutually unsatisfying fumble, how about it? (But I WILL tell my mates we did it all night)"
Pshaw, I referred to that here:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588524&postcount=19
Honesty?
"I've had too much to drink and I'm up for a mutually unsatisfying fumble, how about it? (But I WILL tell my mates we did it all night)"
That white band of skin on my left hand is due to the wedding ring in my right hand pant pocket.
Absolutely, including in the far east like India. Here there is an alignment with what is good and right, and the aspect of a 'written law' mandates it as the enforceable, whereby it cannot be so without appearing as a written law accepted in the judiciary. I see an alignment with the Hebrew laws and the passions seen of those chasing whaling ships and animals being mistreated, both enroute to slaughter and in the absence of safe environments.
It is a reason I am compelled to side with the Hebrew laws, and remain amazed such laws are not seen in derivitive religions of Christianity and Islam - maybe there is but I don't know of them. These must not be alluded to but expressly written to make them a law.
One serves an animal more by accepting these laws, than being a vegetarian - the latter is far easier to do. These are among the 613 Hebrew laws, and they have equal validity with all other laws, including 'not to murder' and the belief in God:
TO FEED AN OWNED ANIMAL BEFORE ONESELF - because the domestic animal is totally dependent on the owner.
NOT TO TAKE THE MOTHER AND CHILD TOGETHER
NOT TO LEAVE A HOLE IN THE GROUND OF AN ANIMAL'S VICINITY
NOT TO BIND AN ANIMAL'S MOUTH DURING THRESHING
NOT TO OVERLOAD AN ANIMAL
TO GIVE ONE DAY OF REST FROM WORK
NOT TO MIX AN ANIMAL IN ITS MOTHER'S MILK [any milk, because we cannot be sure where the milk comes from, but an animal can].
TO ASSIST AN OVERLADEN ANIMAL EVEN IF IT BELONGS TO AN ENEMY. [A most impacting law].
Which would be false.
If you're including "Thou shalt not murder" (one of the ten commandments) then it's 623 laws. And the "equal validity" would be "some of them, for a while, for certain people only".
Unless you know of anyone that keeps Canaanite slaves, of course.
Lev. 25:46.
Bells
Staff member
Sooo.. your desire to talk about slaughtering animals aside, are you saying you agree that this man raped this woman because he was an Arab and she a Jew?
Or what exactly?
If you want to wax the joys about Hebrew laws, then I'd suggest you take it to a more appropriate discussion.
Pandaemoni
Valued Senior Member
Theft is when you say NO or STOP to someone taking your stuff, or you resist, or you are obviously incapable of consenting (eg asleep, unconscious, not present, etc) and someone does it anyway.
Duh.
It's not theft when you CHOOSE to give your things (like your money) to someone,even if they lied to you to induce you to do so...
Oh wait...if someone tells you a lie to induce you to give them something of value, that's fraud and a crime.
So isn't sex "something of value"? Why would it be treated differently, when it seems ethically WORSE to get sex by false pretense than mere cash?
Here, I think, is the answer: I can imagine myself lying to get sex, and yet I do not like to think of myself as a criminal; and if a woman lied to me to get sex, I am sure I'd enjoy it. On the other hand, I cannot imagine myself any likely situation in which I would lie to get someone's cash, and I cannot imagine enjoying being defrauded. b The only difference in the two cases I can see, from an ethical point of view, is that the liar may feel more *compelled* to lie for sex than for money, lying for money may be a more rational process.
On that basis though, I can imagine certain people not enjoying either and wanting a similar remedy against the liar. If the liar was thinking rationally at the time, I am not sure I see a strong basis for different treatment.
Last edited:
One interested in a purely Jewish state, obviously.
Can you really blame them for being interested in that?
Bells
Staff member
I'm sorry, but you think this verdict and sentence is fair and/or correct?
No more than I would any kind of ethnocentric population group. The problem here is, do those who support a Jewish state agree with Jews being treated the same in non-Jewish states? There is many an Avraham who becomes an Abe in Europe. Is he guilty of misrepresentation? Do people know who Issur Danielovitch really is?
Bells
Staff member
Depends.
But do you think it's fair or correct for a woman to consent to sex, cooperate with said sex and facilitate it and then a month and a half later claim she was raped because she found out he was not Jewish? Do you think he raped her by not saying he was Arabic? Do you think having sex with an Arab is rape because he is an Arab?
I can't really see a reason to treat sex as equivalent to money or property, unless you are a prostitute. It's not some hard currency you can't get back once you've given it away or wasted it.
And we are talking here about 'rape'. Whatever else this act might have been, it certainly wasn't rape.
People are not under the obligation to explain themselves to others or to make sense on other people's terms.
I think the rationalistic approach that Western diplomacy and politics (more or less democracy-based), is often inefficient.
The Jews - and many others - are not playing this game and they do not care about it, or care about it only as long as there is benefit for them in it.
Note that traditional "Eastern" diplomacy is a lot different than the "Western" one; as you can read in the Nisbett book, Easterners traditionally don't actually have a diplomacy comparable to the Western one, they don't have a tradition of discussing things and wondering whether something is fair and just. They just demand or bargain, and the arguments they give are secondary. It's something we Westerners are not used to, and consider manipulative, underhand and such.
Bells
Staff member
Okay.
Find me 3 other cases in the last 20 years where a court has found that a man and a woman having had sex voluntarily and consensually, was classified as rape because one party was not the same religion or race of the other. Where one party finds out that the other was not of a particular race and stated it was rape and the court upheld this and found that individual guilty of having raped the other because they were of another race - even though the sex was purely consensual by both parties.
Since this is so common, you should have no difficulty in finding precendents to this case to support the blatant racism that exists in its verdict.
I'll give you a hint. This type of racism existed in times of slavery and before the Civil Rights movement won (of sorts) in the US and of course, in Nazi Germany.
Fair or correct to whom?
It seems you are trying to establish a kind of universal, absolute sense of justice that would be indifferent to any personal, cultural, religious or national concerns and biases.
I don't think such justice exists, or it can exist only at the cost of giving up or compromising every kind of personal, cultural, religious or national identity.
In which case the notion of justice would become superfluous.
@Pandaemoni: Also, if we were to judge honesty in sexual encounters exactly the way we judge fraud, how would you set standards? How much would people be expected to reveal about themselves?
If I say I'm 5'8 and on more careful measurements I am actually 5'7 and a half, did I rape him?
If I say I have green eyes when they are dark grey laced with some green, did I rape him?
Unworkable and unreasonable.
If I say I'm 5'8 and on more careful measurements I am actually 5'7 and a half, did I rape him?
If I say I have green eyes when they are dark grey laced with some green, did I rape him?
Unworkable and unreasonable.
I addressed the question of fraud here.