Originally posted by FetchmyjunkBut can't your stance on rape change in the same way as you claim mine might? Your moral code is rooted in your interpretations of ancient Hebrew mythology. If it stops you from being a rapist, then that's good. But for both of us, we believe rape is wrong. That you call your belief "universal" adds nothing to the fact that we agree that it's wrong.
Either your stance on rape is absolute or it can change.
Originally posted by FMFSo is rape only wrong when you commit it or is it also wrong when someone else commits it?
Because I am talking about me being unchanging. You see, I am not attempting to self-aggrandize by projecting my attempts to be a morally sound and humane being onto you and everyone else by making debating club/petri dish claims about my interactions with the world being "universal" or "absolute" truths.
Originally posted by FMFI have addressed the issue of the Bible and genocide on quite a few occasions. Have you forgotten my views?
My comment - in direct and specific response to a question of yours ~ about genocide, about your Bible, and sonship's Christian justification of that genocide is now 3-4 pages back and slipping further and further as time passes. Have you decided to simply blank it out?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkIn part, because of the way you have been seeking to attach the word "absolute" to all your moral stances, and also because I think you have been using terminology as a gimmick to question the common decency and humanity of people who don't share your religious beliefs.
If rape is wrong for you and for everyone else, then why would you say the statement 'rape is wrong' is not absolute?
Originally posted by FMFI wasn't trying to sum up, I'm just not understanding the 'absolute' part.
I don't think you have been reading the debate if this is how you'd choose to sum it up.
You have both agreed that murder is wrong, but have both said you would murder. In the case of murder, it's not absolute.
Now, you are attempting the same thing with rape, as if each morally wrong issue is either always wrong, or may be okay, sometimes.
If rape is always wrong, and is a 'lesser' crime than murder, then why are you both willing to murder, yet not rape?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAre you willing to say whether or not your god figure supposedly ordering his "Chosen People" to carry out a genocide established a "universal truth" in your mind?
I have addressed the issue of the Bible and genocide on quite a few occasions. Have you forgotten my views?
Originally posted by FMFSo basically if your belief that 'rape is wrong' is not absolute, it means that if someone else held the view that rape is not wrong you would tolerate their view and be open to the possibility that they may be right.
In part, because of the way you have been seeking to attach the word "absolute" to all your moral stances, and also because I think you have been using terminology as a gimmick to question the common decency and humanity of people who don't share your religious beliefs.
Originally posted by chaney3I think both killing and raping are morally wrong. I'd be willing to kill in self-defence, depending on the situation, and would avoid it if possible, but if I did do it in order to prevent an evil act by a person threatening me or people around me with death, I think it would be morally justifiable.
I wasn't trying to sum up, I'm just not understanding the 'absolute' part.
You have both agreed that murder is wrong, but have both said you would murder. In the case of murder, it's not absolute.
Now, you are attempting the same thing with rape, as if each morally wrong issue is either always wrong, or may be okay, sometimes.
If rape is always wrong, and is a 'lesser' crime than murder, then why are you both willing to murder, yet not rape?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkOnce again, you asked about this before, specifically. And I answered it. But you just blanked it out. Just now, I pointed this out to you, and you simply repeated yourself.
So basically if your belief that 'rape is wrong' is not absolute, it means that if someone else held the view that rape is not wrong you would tolerate their view and be open to the possibility that they may be right.
Originally posted by FMF1. God declares an annihilation form of judgment to stamp out a cancer.
Are you willing to say whether or not your god figure supposedly ordering his "Chosen People" to carry out a genocide established a "universal truth" in your mind?
2. The judgments are for public recognition of extreme sin.
3. Judgment is preceded by warning and/or long periods of exposure to the truth and time to repent.
4. Any and all ‘innocent’ adults are given a way of escape with their families; sometimes all given a way to avoid judgment via repentance or leaving a particular region. It should also be noted that expulsion from a land was the most common judgment, not extermination. This pattern goes all the way back to the ejection of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (cf. Gen. 3:24).
5. Someone is almost always saved (redeemed) from the evil culture.
6. The judgment of God falls.
https://carm.org/god-of-old-testament-a-monster
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFYou are just blanking out that your views on rape are unchanging and therefore absolute. But you just won't admit it.
Once again, you asked about this before, specifically. And I answered it. But you just blanked it out. Just now, I pointed this out to you, and you simply repeated yourself.