FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Topic started by: clarita21 on March 16, 2012, 03:42:49 am
-
A minister in Morocco's Islamist government called for a change to a law allowing a rapist to marry his victim after a 16-year-old teenager forced into such a union committed suicide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :BangHead: ( NOW ISNT THIS CRAZY! ) NOW i think they need do somethingabout this quick what do you think?
-
That is the CRAZIEST thing I have ever heard! I would NOT be forced to marry ANYONE, let alone the one who raped me!!! >:(
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
That's a humorous angle on an incredibly disturbing topic. :crybaby2:
If it's Islamic would'nt it be the Quaran? I think it's probably time to change the subject. :peace:
-
this is disturbing .but sadly islamic is not the only culture that employes in small ways.what about in american society where we encourage to stay by there maneven though by thier man after he beat them.
-
Most people who are forced to be married have their lives controlled by their parents/guardians. Marrying their rapist is completely unbelievable, not only will they have to marry their rapist but they may relive it and the victim can easily develop depression, anxiety, their lives are constantly being controlled, become a victim of domestic violence. Anyone who marries their rapist is putting themselves in serious danger, and their lives will be controlled; not being able to do anything without their partner's permission and they may also be verbally abused as well as financially.
-
That is absolutely crazy! There is no way in hockey sticks that a girl should have to do that/continue to endure suffering. What is this world coming to?!? :wave:
-
Absolutely inhumane
-
i think thats crazy and a really difficult situation. i feel really bad for the girl thaugh. i myself am muslim but i dont think there is something about that in the quaran. and then again what can i do really. just watch i cant anyting about other peoples culture. but i sure hope it stops.
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
Islamic religion does not respect women in any way, and is male chauvinistic in every way. Which other religion allows men to marry any number of wives, and asks women to cover their whole body from head to toe? Unfair to women in every way, and the pity is these women never seem to realize that! Did you know that a man in Islamic religion can divorce his wife even over the phone by uttering the word Talak three times "Talak, Talak, Talak". :o
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
I knew some "genius" would compare this to the Bible.I'm only surprised someone beat Falcon9 to it. ::)
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
Well, I'm not sure what goats went for back then however, he was pretty close.
I knew some "genius" would compare this to the Bible.I'm only surprised someone beat Falcon9 to it. ::)
No comparisons were needed since there are 'direct quotes'. I'm slightly surprised that even a diminished-capacity xtian wouldn't want to 'thump' that reference out of the 'babble/bible', (although it doesn't take a "genius" to figure out why). Here's the refutation of your false denial:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." -- Deu. 22:28:29, NIV
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." -- Deu. 22:28:29, KJV
So, your religious indocrination manual authorizes rape as long as her dad is paid-off and you marry her. How special.
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
Well, I'm not sure what goats went for back then however, he was pretty close.
I knew some "genius" would compare this to the Bible.I'm only surprised someone beat Falcon9 to it. ::)
No comparisons were needed since there are 'direct quotes'. I'm slightly surprised that even a diminished-capacity xtian wouldn't want to 'thump' that reference out of the 'babble/bible', (although it doesn't take a "genius" to figure out why). Here's the refutation of your false denial:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." -- Deu. 22:28:29, NIV
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." -- Deu. 22:28:29, KJV
So, your religious indocrination manual authorizes rape as long as her dad is paid-off and you marry her. How special.
the NIV version is a terrible translation and that is very evident with the following words "and they are discovered". Note the 'they' used indicates mutuality and not 'rape'. The word was likely closer in meaning to 'seduces'.
-
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." -- Deu. 22:28:29, NIV
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." -- Deu. 22:28:29, KJV
[/quote]
the NIV version is a terrible translation and that is very evident with the following words "and they are discovered". Note the 'they' used indicates mutuality and not 'rape'. The word was likely closer in meaning to 'seduces'.
Not quite; the original Hebrew-Aramaic words were "taphas and shakab", which are "to seize and lay hold of" + "to lie (as in sexual relations)". Hence, the use of the word taphas in conjunction with shakab in Deuteronomy implies that the sexual act was forced upon the maiden without her consent. It also tacitly implies that if they weren't 'found out/discovered' then the admonishments wouldn't apply. The whole thing sounds a bit like a consenting women either isn't 'discovered' and remains silent or, gets busted and 'cries rape' after consent, (thus denying consent after the fact and falsely accusing the man - who earns a death sentence as a result). If the man 'seduced' the woman, (which means to entice, beguile, manipulate), then he either did so with or against her will. IIRC, back then, the woman's family provided a marriage dowry so, the fifty sheckels in silver wouldn't be paid by the seducer, it would've been paid by the bride's family. This discrepency causes doubt about the admonishment's translations.
-
There is no way in hell that I would marry a man who raped me. I too would be shopping for rat poison. This is another example of how ancient and I do mean ancient Arab culture is confused with Islam. The law of Islam is just and does not force marriage on any woman. Tribal law on the other hand is this nonsense that a woman who has been raped by some nut case has to marry him. It is ignorance and it is not sanctioned by what is holy. If you read the Qur'an you will not find any such nonsense in it. I feel such hurt for a young girl barely out of puberty given by her parents to a monster. I have many questions about the circumstances of the situation. One of them is how did he gain access to her. This is not America this is an Islamic country where women do not walk around loose. This creep had to have stalked her and entrapped her believe me it wasn't a haphazard happenstance nor was it easy. The biblical reference is not current law as relates to the situation as Muslims consider Mohammed's(PABBUH) revelation as the current law and there is no allowance for rape.
-
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." -- Deu. 22:28:29, NIV
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." -- Deu. 22:28:29, KJV
the NIV version is a terrible translation and that is very evident with the following words "and they are discovered". Note the 'they' used indicates mutuality and not 'rape'. The word was likely closer in meaning to 'seduces'.
Not quite; the original Hebrew-Aramaic words were "taphas and shakab", which are "to seize and lay hold of" + "to lie (as in sexual relations)". Hence, the use of the word taphas in conjunction with shakab in Deuteronomy implies that the sexual act was forced upon the maiden without her consent. It also tacitly implies that if they weren't 'found out/discovered' then the admonishments wouldn't apply. The whole thing sounds a bit like a consenting women either isn't 'discovered' and remains silent or, gets busted and 'cries rape' after consent, (thus denying consent after the fact and falsely accusing the man - who earns a death sentence as a result). If the man 'seduced' the woman, (which means to entice, beguile, manipulate), then he either did so with or against her will. IIRC, back then, the woman's family provided a marriage dowry so, the fifty sheckels in silver wouldn't be paid by the seducer, it would've been paid by the bride's family. This discrepency causes doubt about the admonishment's translations.
'Now someone may want to argue that the preceding examples do not combine the two words together as is the case with Deuteronomy 22. Hence, the use of the word taphas in conjunction with shakab in Deuteronomy implies that the sexual act was forced upon the maiden without her consent. A careful reading of both the passage itself, as well as its surrounding context, dispels such a notion. We quote the passage again, yet this time adding the surrounding context for further clarification:
"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces (chazaq) her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman CRIED OUT, but there was no one to save her. If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and THEY ARE found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days." Deuteronomy 22:25-29 NKJV
Although vv. 25-27 refers to a woman that is betrothed, the point is still clear. By screaming, the woman indicates that she is being forced to have sex without her consent. Hence, when the woman does not scream this indicates that she willfully chose to engage in the sexual act with the man. This is further seen from vv. 28-29 where both the man and the woman are held accountable, i.e. "and THEY ARE found out." This is unlike the woman of vv. 25-27 who is said to be not guilty.
Also notice that in v. 25 a different word is used when signifying rape, namely chazaq. If the inspired author wanted to imply that the woman in vv. 28-29 was being raped, he could have used this same word chazaq; especially since this is the word he uses in the preceding verses to refer to an actual rape incident. The fact that he didn't use it should further caution us from reading rape into vv. 28-29.
This is supported by other OT passages. In the places where rape is mentioned none of them use the word taphas with anah. Rather, the authors use the word chazaq with anah to convey this notion'
source:http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/ot_and_rape.htm
-
It is a much different society,I could not imagine forcing my daughters to marry anyone, let alone their rapist.Ithink a big part of the Bible intentions is to make sure the woman is supported,since as a non -virgin she is un- marriable and there for worhtless- in this day and age that is ludicrous-but I wonder if a man would think twice if he had to pay fines as well as jail time.
-
"Also notice that in v. 25 a different word is used when signifying rape, namely chazaq. If the inspired author wanted to imply that the woman in vv. 28-29 was being raped, he could have used this same word chazaq; especially since this is the word he uses in the preceding verses to refer to an actual rape incident. The fact that he didn't use it should further caution us from reading rape into vv. 28-29."
Seduced, raped, consented; there was still a fifty sheckels of silver pay-off involved. Whether a fine, pay-off or dowry, something engendered 'blood money'.
-
One of the most insane things I have heard in a long time!
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
No where in the Bible does it say it alright for a woman to be raped let alone marry her rapist.
-
This law needs to be changed.
Not only is the girl humiliated when she was raped but by having to marry him
she has to be humiliated for the rest of her life.
This law is just insane ... but some other countries are extremely backwards and think this is ok ... from a moral standpoint ... It Is Plain Wrong.
-
Bible says it's ok. I think you just owe the girls dad a goat or something.
The Bible doesn't say any such thing.
Well, I'm not sure what goats went for back then however, he was pretty close.
I knew some "genius" would compare this to the Bible.I'm only surprised someone beat Falcon9 to it. ::)
No comparisons were needed since there are 'direct quotes'. I'm slightly surprised that even a diminished-capacity xtian wouldn't want to 'thump' that reference out of the 'babble/bible', (although it doesn't take a "genius" to figure out why). Here's the refutation of your false denial:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." -- Deu. 22:28:29, NIV
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." -- Deu. 22:28:29, KJV
So, your religious indocrination manual authorizes rape as long as her dad is paid-off and you marry her. How special.
the NIV version is a terrible translation and that is very evident with the following words "and they are discovered". Note the 'they' used indicates mutuality and not 'rape'. The word was likely closer in meaning to 'seduces'.
WAIT A MINUTE! Are you saying that someone could read a quote from the Bible and misconstrue it's meaning? I don't believe it.
-
It's sad and crazy
-
Now, if the girl wanted to marry the guy who raped her, fine, that's her choice. But if they are actually forcing the girl to marry her rapist, then I feel bad for them.
-
Stuff like this breaks my heart...The suffering people, especially children, go through. :angry7:
-
Utter outrage. Everyone will be judged, they will get theres.
-
Utter outrage.
That's xtianity's 'unholy book(s)' for you - utterly outrageous.
Everyone will be judged, they will get theres.
Everyone is being judged on a daily basis - right now, so we're already there, (as opposed to 'their').
-
This so stupid, this country is not giving the victim of rape to try to live a normal life or any rights to punish her rapist.
All this law will do is to give the rapist the right to rape, and keep making the victim a victim everyday.
-
I think the rapist should get castrated . Then feed raw :-X to the person forcing this action to get approved. :notworthy:
-
Poor girl, I wish she would have just killed him in his sleep instead of killing herself, then again she probably would be killed herself for doing that in that country. I wonder if God would give her a pass into heaven even though she committed suicide, or if she did kill him would He give her a pass on that one.
-
This is so one of the best examples of why I read the posts daily. This is enough information and drama to make me be okay with not watching primetime TV.
And of course, let it be know, under no circumstances should anyone be forced into a committment such as marriage.
-
Thats crazy!!!!!! :angry7: