Does Atheism Lead to Immoral Behavior?

[SkepticThinker]

You wouldn't think so, when the head of the Western world, US, constantly has its leaders
accused of sexual crimes .. da da da da ..

What's that got to do with marriage rates?

 

[muhammad_isa]

What's that got to do with marriage rates?

I'm not talking about rates .. I'm talking about the institution itself.

Rape isn't a thing that should be an everyday occurrence.
The charge of rape is thrown around in the US, as if it is something that happens regularly in society.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'm not talking about rates .. I'm talking about the institution itself.

You said, "Marriage is an institution that is disappearing in the Western world, and has become optional."

If you're saying less and less people are getting married now, then you are talking about marriage rates.

Rape isn't a thing that should be an everyday occurrence.

I agree.

The charge of rape is thrown around in the US, as if it is something that happens regularly in society.

That's because it is something that happens "regularly in society" unfortunately.

Every rapist should be hunted down and locked up with the key thrown away.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That's because it is something that happens "regularly in society" unfortunately..

Don't you think that people's attitudes towards marriage has any bearing on
how people behave?
..because I do.

A person who thinks they can seduce a woman and get away with it, is more
likely to engage in such behaviour.

Compulsory marriage eliminates a lot of such behaviour.

 

[Polymath257]

Don't you think that people's attitudes towards marriage has any bearing on
how people behave?
..because I do.

Certainly they do. For example, it seems that it leads some to think that forcing a woman to have sex is legitimate.

A person who thinks they can seduce a woman and get away with it, is more
likely to engage in such behaviour.

Garbage. There is no 'getting away with it' if the sex is consensual. And having consensual sex is not a signal that a person is likely to rape (non-consensual sex).

Compulsory marriage eliminates a lot of such behaviour.

No, it only puts it into the marriage and thereby hides it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Don't you think that people's attitudes towards marriage has any bearing on
how people behave?
..because I do.

Well yes. We've been talking about your view that wives should obey their husbands and that it's not rape if a husband doesn't leave any marks, etc., for many many pages now. If a husband forces his wife to have sex against her will, most people view that as rape. You ... well, you're all over the place.

But other than that, I don't see the connection you seem to be trying to make about falling marriage rates and rape. Perhaps you could expand upon that a bit.

A person who thinks they can seduce a woman and get away with it, is more
likely to engage in such behaviour.

Sorry, what? Seduce a woman and get away with it .... ? Do you mean rape??

Compulsory marriage eliminates a lot of such behaviour.

It seems to sanction it, according to the views you've expressed here.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No, it only puts it into the marriage and thereby hides it.

That is untrue.
A society that is based on belief, and the death penalty for playing around with women,
will have a lower rate of sexual misdemeanour.

There is nothing "hidden" in marriage .. it is a contract between a man and a woman.
They are free to dissolve it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Sorry, what? Seduce a woman and get away with it .... ? Do you mean rape??

Don't you understand the meaning of seduce?
It works both ways .. a man can seduce a woman, and a woman can seduce a man.

Both men and women are attracted to each other.
They may do something that they regret later.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Don't you understand the meaning of seduce?

Not in the sense that you're using it, I don't think. Hence my request for clarification.

It works both ways .. a man can seduce a woman, and a woman can seduce a man.

Both men and women are attracted to each other.
They may do something that they regret later.

And this has become about as clarified as mud.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Every rapist should be hunted down and locked up with the key thrown away.

That includes an abusive husband who doesn't have his wife's consent but forces himself on her anyway. A man who rapes his wife is a sexual predator who should be arrested, charged, convicted, and sent to prison where he can rot. I've heard some horrific stories about what can happen to men in prison.

What goes around comes around.

 

[muhammad_isa]

And this has become about as clarified as mud.

Are you sure you don't understand?

Let's take the issue of the latest "Trump" case.
A woman claims that she has been raped decades later..

It might be that Trump seduced her, and she was involved in a "one off".
It then becomes an issue of whether she was raped, or whether it was consensual sex.

At the time, she might have been thinking "OK, I fancy him" .. and Trump took advantage of that.
..or maybe she was enraged by what Trump was doing .. we wouldn't know for sure.

In a society where sexual relations is confined to marriage, Trump would have known that what he was doing was illegal,
IN EVERY CASE, and that it was a very serious issue.

..that is if Trump actually did have relations with her .. which is not known for sure, as far as I know.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Are you sure you don't understand?

Let's take the issue of the latest "Trump" case.
A woman claims that she has been raped decades later..

It might be that Trump seduced her, and she was involved in a "one off".
It then becomes an issue of whether she was raped, or whether it was consensual sex.

At the time, she might have been thinking "OK, I fancy him" .. and Trump took advantage of that.
..or maybe she was enraged by what Trump was doing .. we wouldn't know for sure.

Ah, I see. So it's the old "she had sex and regretted it later and cried rape" apologetics nonsense men have been trying since the beginning of time.
This is just more chauvinistic garbage.

She said she didn't want him to do what he did to her. She told two of her friends about it right after it happened. People generally don't do that when they've just had a nice consensual sexual interaction.

In a society where sexual relations is confined to marriage, Trump would have known that what he was doing was illegal,
IN EVERY CASE, and that it was a very serious issue.

Trump was a married man at the time. Unless he's a complete moron, he knew what he was doing was wrong. That didn't seem to stop him.

..that is if Trump actually did have relations with her .. which is not known for sure, as far as I know.

A jury found of him guilty of sexual abuse and defamation.

 

[Polymath257]

That is untrue.
A society that is based on belief, and the death penalty for playing around with women,
will have a lower rate of sexual misdemeanour.

There is nothing "hidden" in marriage .. it is a contract between a man and a woman.
They are free to dissolve it.

It hides the rape (non-consensual sex) and abuse that happens inside of the marriage. To think that permission only needs to be given once is part of the problem here. That is what hides the rape and abuse.

 

[Polymath257]

Don't you understand the meaning of seduce?
It works both ways .. a man can seduce a woman, and a woman can seduce a man.

Both men and women are attracted to each other.
They may do something that they regret later.

OK, so they regret it. As long as it is consensual, that is their problem. if it isn't consensual, then one of them is a rapist.

 

[Polymath257]

Are you sure you don't understand?

Let's take the issue of the latest "Trump" case.
A woman claims that she has been raped decades later..

It might be that Trump seduced her, and she was involved in a "one off".
It then becomes an issue of whether she was raped, or whether it was consensual sex.

At the time, she might have been thinking "OK, I fancy him" .. and Trump took advantage of that.
..or maybe she was enraged by what Trump was doing .. we wouldn't know for sure.

In a society where sexual relations is confined to marriage, Trump would have known that what he was doing was illegal,
IN EVERY CASE, and that it was a very serious issue.

If he forced her to have sex, he should have known that was illegal. Did he even bother to ask her is she wanted sex? if not, then he did something wrong and illegal.

But, if both people wanted sex, there is no reason for the law to get involved.

As an analogy. It is legal for someone to give away money. It is legal for someone to take money that is offered.

But it is illegal to force someone to give you their money.

Now, if one person claims they were robbed and the other says that the money is freely given, what is the law to do?

I would suggest the exact same should happen in a case of disputed rape.

..that is if Trump actually did have relations with her .. which is not known for sure, as far as I know.

A jury decided that he did based on the evidence.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Trump was a married man at the time. Unless he's a complete moron, he knew what he was doing was wrong..

..but that is not true, is it.
It is not illegal in the West to have a mistress.

 

[muhammad_isa]

OK, so they regret it. As long as it is consensual, that is their problem. if it isn't consensual, then one of them is a rapist.

I know .. that is your opinion of how to run "the law"

..but a society that is based on marriage & belief, and the death penalty for playing around with women,
will have a lower rate of sexual misdemeanour.
Any abuse in marriage is a separate issue.

 

[SkepticThinker]

..but that is not true, is it.
It is not illegal in the West to have a mistress.

Just because it's not illegal doesn't make it wrong to cheat on one's spouse. People who make such vows to each other know the vow they've made. Violating said vow is wrong, and I'm pretty sure Trump was aware of that, given that he paid off a porn start not to jap about their affair as well.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I know .. that is your opinion of how to run "the law"

..but a society that is based on marriage & belief, and the death penalty for playing around with women,
will have a lower rate of sexual misdemeanour.
Any abuse in marriage is a separate issue.

I think the death penalty is immoral. This isn't the freaking Dark Ages.

I'd love for you to demonstrate the veracity of your claim though.

 

[Polymath257]

..but that is not true, is it.
It is not illegal in the West to have a mistress.

It isn't illegal (and it shouldn't be). If the agreement in the marriage is that there should be no mistresses, then it is wrong (but not illegal) to have a mistress. On the other hand, if the agreement between those in the marriage is that other partners are allowed, then there is no moral or legal issue.

I would point out that it is just as moral or immoral for the man to have a partner outside of the marriage as it is for the woman. And, if they both agree, it is not immoral to do so.