Is Rape just relatively wrong? Or ABSOLUTELY WRONG?

[jasoncran]

i disagree, as that goes back to the problem as before to which you agreed the majority of men who has the sword determine morality, and those disagree will perish or will lack the courage to stand up(if evil is called good)

i have been to war, and no man may ever convince me that we humans by our lonesome are even capable of good to the point that we dont need god.

the russian made the locals kill thier own children in afghanistan. i have seen the mass graves.

by your thinking hitler was wrong simply because of your opinion, but that if I say he was right my opinion is just as right as yours :crazy

 

[Free]

Jason, I apologise if I'm failing to explain myself properly. I have been trying to explain from the beginning that there is no absolute standard from God or from any other source. The judgement that murder is wrong is made individually by every person who holds that view.

You have agreed with me that there is no absolute standard of beauty or art. This doesn't stop you from making judgements about what is beautiful. In the same way, you don't need an absolute standard of morality to make judgements of right and wrong.

I'm sorry I'm not getting through to you. I'm running out of ways to say it.

You can make judgments about right and wrong without an absolute standard of morality but those judgments are then meaningless to anyone but you or those who just happen to agree with you. Yet this is precisely what moral relativism would have us believe to be the case. I can guarantee you that no one can consistently live with that belief.

There is no absolute standard from God because God is the standard.

 

[stranger]

logical bob wrote:

No, I'm making a judgement about the validity of philosophical arguments. It's an objective question.

I see the statement 'murder is wrong' having to do with the value of human life. Likewise some folks value Bon Jovi's music - you don't. We don't have to be conscious of 'value judgments' to make them all day long. Ever bought anything 'on special' ? If so, that is a blantant value for money judgment.

It's true that there's a tree outside my window and false that there's a goat in my kitchen. These are facts, not values. I can see where you're coming from though. I'm planning a new thread looking at absolute truth in general, not just in ethics. Look out for it.

I am not talking about the intrinsic value of the goat or the tree - but the value of your trustworthiness in making a true statement, or standing against a false one.

A new tread? Great, it would be good to post on topic for a change.

ps The trouble with conscience is that it can be wrongly informed or even severed.

 

[Mohrb]

Wanted to pop in on an offshoot of the original topic, so this will not likely be applicable to the "current" conversation.

"Rape" needs to have a specific definition. When we think of rape, it's the supreme act of malice. A person violently forces himself (or herself) upon another person, violating them on the deepest level. It is a horrific act that the victim will never really "recover" from. That is absolutely wrong.

However, it seems that today a lot of women don't understand the gravity of the word. I've spoken to girls who will go to a party planning on getting drunk and fooling around with particular guys who they KNOW go to parties to have sex with girls. The girl doesn't really intend on going that far before hand, they just want to fool around a bit. The next day, when this girl sobered up, she regretted it. And accused the guy of raping her.

... "Rape" is horrific and unforgivable. Not an accusation that should just be tossed around at someone's convenience to get out of taking responsibility for their own actions.

A former room mate of mine was also accused of rape. Similar situation, he hooked up with a girl who made it quite clear she was interested in him. He believed he was just hooking up with a girl at a party consensually. However, later, he found out that she had a boyfriend. She didn't want to admit to cheating on her boyfriend, so she just said she was raped. She took no responsibility for her actions, and the title "rapist" has followed this person for years.

Raping someone is unforgivable. Falsely accusing someone of rape is also unforgivable.

Last example was just something I read on an advice forum. A girl had a question... again, about getting drunk with some guy and sleeping with him. She continued an informal relationship with him and liked the guy afterword.... but after being sober, she regreted moving so fast while they were both intoxicated. The advice she was given is that sex is similar to a contract. If she was intoxicated, she couldn't legally enter a contract, therefore she was raped. The fact that he was just as intoxicated didn't really matter because he was a guy and therefore he did the "violating."

I don't know if she did press charges or not. But, what women have to understand... is if you get drunk and sleep with some guy and regret it later... that's not rape. If you press charges, and the guy goes to jail for being a rapist.... what will happen to him IS rape.

... just something to keep in mind.

 

[jasoncran]

no the law says that one cant give consent while drunk! that's called statuorary rape and that is a good law.

by your thinking if i get a girl drunk deliberately and she consents its ok. its not if she did want to in the first place.

if we do that, then all manner of evil can be justified for you see i was drunk.

that type of 'rape" is common.

 

[Mohrb]

True, there are many ways to force people into situations not of their choosing. Physically overpowering a person raping them is the worst form. Drugging them is also an unacceptable way to force yourself upon them. Or someone can emotionally overpower a person and force yourself upon them.

None are acceptable. However, there's a large difference between finding a random girl, drugging her, and having your way with her while she's passed out (which would constitute rape, IMO) and a couple going to a party planning on getting drunk and fooling around, then later regretting the actions they chose to take.

... My major complaint is that our society is entirely unequal. Most people focus on giving women every advantage men have, yet it's unthinkable to consider the disadvantages of the male gender.

Consider this situation:

A married man is bored with his wife and goes to a bar looking to hook up with someone. He drinks a few, then sees a woman he knows he can seduce walk into the bar. He works his charm, goes back to her place and he cheats on his wife. When he comes home, his wife knows what happened. He said "I was drunk. She raped me." He presses charges. She goes to jail and is forcefully sodomized for the next year or so.

Sound unreasonable? Try the same story, but reverse the genders.

A married woman is bored with her husband and goes to a bar looking to hook up with someone. She drinks a few, then sees a man she knows she can seduce walk into the bar. She works her charm, goes back to his place, and cheats on her husband. When she comes home, her husband knows what happened. She says "I was drunk, he raped me." She presses charges. He goes to jail and is forcefully sodomized for the next year or so.


Still sound unrealistic?


... I'm not making any excuses for rape. Rape is horrible. But it's also a horrible accusation. One people through around far too lightly. Actual rapists SHOULD go to jail and they deserve what happens to them there. But I've -seen- men find out later that the girl changed her mind and decided she shouldn't have done what she did.... and the guy pays for it for the rest of his life.

 

[Kevin Lowery]

Yeah "Mohrb", I know your not trying to "justify" rape, adultery, or fornication.
I fully understand what you are saying, I have been in a situation like that
wear a girl I was fornicating started lying about me & telling people I was raping her.
When the truth is, she pretty much seduced me every-time, I would always say
"No, we can't do this, it's wrong", and she would always start touching me in places & telling dirty things even when I said no, and would not stop, and I always eventually gave in, because any man knows once when I girl keeps touching you in certian places, it's kind of hard to make them stop.
Alot of woman will lie about who they really are & what they really do, and even get others in trouble
in the process, just to try to make themselves look like innocent little angels.

 

[jasoncran]

mohrb, prison rape isnt that common, you watch too much tv. i have friends that work in prison, and it happens but its rare.

rape a guy like that, its not unheard of where the victim put razors in the proper place to ensure the "lover" gets the idea of "no!"

yes , not all rapes are true rapes, people do lie about that, that is another topic.

 

[Mohrb]

Yeah "Mohrb", I know your not trying to "justify" rape, adultery, or fornication.
I fully understand what you are saying, I have been in a situation like that
wear a girl I was fornicating started lying about me & telling people I was raping her.
When the truth is, she pretty much seduced me every-time, I would always say
"No, we can't do this, it's wrong", and she would always start touching me in places & telling dirty things even when I said no, and would not stop, and I always eventually gave in, because any man knows once when I girl keeps touching you in certian places, it's kind of hard to make them stop.
Alot of woman will lie about who they really are & what they really do, and even get others in trouble
in the process, just to try to make themselves look like innocent little angels.

Which brings up another inequity. In your example, a woman came on to you, you said "no." She may not have physically overpowered you with brute force, but she did force herself upon you when you told her no. What do you think would happen if you went to the police or any "rape help" group and told them your story? Would a guy get any assistance? Absolutely not.

Not entirely "common" but I personally know girls who will intentionally go out and get pregnant in order to collect child support (then find another guy to date and support her and her child so that she can be fully supported by one person while pocketing the child support for herself). Imagine if in your situation, she got pregnant. You may be financially crippled for the next 18 years. Child support ain't cheap. And once the deed is done, you would have absolutely NO choice in the matter. If you didn't want the child, you have to pay anyway. If you wanted the child, she has every legal right to tell you she's aborting it and you'd have absolutely nothing you can do to protect your child's life.... if she even tells you at all. You might not even be informed.

And yes, when a woman is raped, she's much more likely to sustain physical injury, and having to go through a pregnancy is never easy... but at least after the act is over she can take control of the situation again. Although I don't approve of abortion, she has that legal right (and in the case of rape, I wouldn't judge a girl if she made that decision), she could give it up for adoption, or she could keep it at her discretion.

Again... women certainly don't "have it easy." I'm not minimizing their risk at all... but I am pointing out that men can be victims of rape too, with all the same emotional trauma, and a complete lack of control over the potential life of their child as well as the fact that supporting a child you may never see for 18 years may make it impossible for you to support a family of your own. So, when a man is raped, it does have comparable long term effects. Yet, men have no where we can turn to for help to be taken seriously.

 

[jasoncran]

men have been raped. i have been sexually assaulted(unwanted sexual touching by a bi man). in the army. i know it happens.
nothing of the rape type , but i didnt want him to touch me. i was asleep when he did this and caught him doing it but i wasnt sure what i was seeing, half-awake. and very tired, got back from the woods. he was drunk as i recall them smell of tequila on him.
and i know this guy!

 

[Ninjasaurus]

An atheist chimes in...

Of course rape is absolutely wrong. But I think you misunderstand moral relativism. Moral relativism is the position that moral codes can differ among individuals and cultures. To bring up a modern-day example, fundamentalist Muslim regimes in the Middle East consider women to be below men. They are married off to husbands who may rape them, since he considers his wife to be his "property." This is perfectly right and just to them.

This culture, meanwhile, considers rape to be absolutely wrong. Of course, there are a couple of odd ducks out there who think that women "deserve it" or something.

And don't get me started on all the immorality in the Bible.

 

[logical bob]

So the question is, do you think a man in the Middle East is justified in raping his wife?

 

[Ninjasaurus]

So the question is, do you think a man in the Middle East is justified in raping his wife?

My view is that all forms of rape are not justified at all because rape harms other people. That doesn't mean that it seems wrong to the rapist, though. That's moral relativism.

 

[logical bob]

OK, then I agree with you.

 

[Free]

So the question is, do you think a man in the Middle East is justified in raping his wife?

My view is that all forms of rape are not justified at all because rape harms other people.

Physical harm, emotional/psychological harm, or both?

 

[Bent Radar]

My view is that all forms of rape are not justified at all because rape harms other people. That doesn't mean that it seems wrong to the rapist, though. That's moral relativism.

So would it be valid for said rapist to claim that no harm was done to the victim?

 

[Danus]

"Then I learned that all moral judgments are ‘value judgments,’ that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either ‘right’ or ‘wrong.’ I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments. Believe it or not, I figured out for myself–what apparently the Chief Justice couldn’t figure out for himself–that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any ‘reason’ to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring–the strength of character–to throw off its shackles…I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable ‘value judgment’ that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these ‘others?’ Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more than a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as ‘moral’ or ‘good’ and others as ‘immoral’ or ‘bad’? In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure that I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my education has led me–after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and uninhibited self."

- Ted Bundy

http://blatzkrieg.wordpress.com/2008/07 ... ating-ham/

 

[jasoncran]

i have forgotten that.

 

[Free]

"Then I learned that all moral judgments are ‘value judgments,’ that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either ‘right’ or ‘wrong.’ I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments. Believe it or not, I figured out for myself–what apparently the Chief Justice couldn’t figure out for himself–that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any ‘reason’ to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring–the strength of character–to throw off its shackles…I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable ‘value judgment’ that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these ‘others?’ Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more than a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as ‘moral’ or ‘good’ and others as ‘immoral’ or ‘bad’? In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure that I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my education has led me–after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and uninhibited self."

- Ted Bundy

http://blatzkrieg.wordpress.com/2008/07 ... ating-ham/

Disturbing but that pretty much nails it.

 

[logical bob]

What's the point of the Bundy quote? You make it sound like anyone who doesn't believe in objective moral values is likely to be a serial killer. Me and thousands of other people disprove that.

What keeps us from killing people for fun? Do you think that acting like Bundy would be fun? Do you want to kill people but deny that urge because you believe in objective moral values? Of course you don't. Like me, you're outraged and disgusted by Bundy and people like him. If you could do what he did and be sure to go unpunished you'd still choose not to. If you lost your faith tomorrow you'd never for a moment consider rape or murder.

Whatever keeps us from crossing that line, it isn't objective moral values.

1 edit for spelling.