Tara Reade who accuses Biden of sexual assault now fears for her life.

[nPeace]

Yes.

How many times does this need to be explained to you?

Why are you refusing to answer my question?

 

[fantome profane]

Why are you refusing to answer my question?

I answered your question. I answered it clearly and directly.

You asked "
During sex, the guy says, "Stop."
The girl continues. Is she guilty of rape?"

I answered "Yes".


If you were referring to this question:
"Really? You don't seriously believe that. Do you?"

The answer is Yes. Yes really. Really Yes. I do seriously believe that.

I think I have been more than clear. I think I have answered your question clearly.

You seem to have a serious mental block that prevents you from understanding what is really a very simple concept.

If someone says stop, stop.

 

[Yerda]

Just as I thought Feminism It's about the woman The man is of no account.

Not feminism, elementary moral reasoning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes.

How many times does this need to be explained to you?

755 times.

 

[Father Heathen]

You seem to have much to say about others, but really caring to take the time to look at the facts, helps alleviate the judgmental mentality.

What facts shall I take a gander at?

 

[nPeace]

I answered your question. I answered it clearly and directly.

You asked "
During sex, the guy says, "Stop."
The girl continues. Is she guilty of rape?"

I answered "Yes".


If you were referring to this question:
"Really? You don't seriously believe that. Do you?"

The answer is Yes. Yes really. Really Yes. I do seriously believe that.

I think I have been more than clear. I think I have answered your question clearly.

Oh. Sorry. I didn't realize you said yes to that.
Obviously that is your opinion.
I would like to see you win that case in court.
There are no one sided coins that I am aware of.
You seem to be staring at one side of the coin, and saying that's the whole coin. Flip it, and the other side shows up.

You seem to have a serious mental block that prevents you from understanding what is really a very simple concept.

If someone says stop, stop.

Actually, I don't know if you have ever tickled your children.
Did they ever tell you stop? Did you?
When you stopped, did they want you to continue?

So, I ask again. Did you mean like this...
STOP! STOP!

I'm putting the words to the picture, in case you didn't notice.

Woman tells trial she was in shock during alleged rape

A woman has described how she felt paralysed and her "body and mind went into autopilot" as she was allegedly raped and sexually assaulted by five men.

www.rte.ie

Would you like to judge this case?

What facts shall I take a gander at?

The facts which show that there are courts in place to prevent frivolous cries of alleged rape.
Try these.

sexual assault case was tossed because the woman didn’t scream during alleged attack
The woman told authorities that the man threatened to not provide her with work if she did not submit to sexual acts, according to the BBC, which cited a report by an Italian newspaper.

The woman said that, perhaps, she should have been more forceful, but “with people who are too strong, I just freeze,” she said, according to the BBC.

Once penetration has occurred with the female's consent, if the female changes her mind does force from that point (where she changes her mind) constitute rape?
These cases point out that the presence or absence of consent at the moment of initial penetration appears to be the crucial point in the crime of rape. For example, if at the moment of penetration the victim has not consented, no amount of consent given thereafter will prevent the act from being a rape. Also, a victim may give consent during preparatory acts all the way up to the moment of penetration, but the victim may withdraw that consent immediately before penetration and if communicated to the perpetrator, the act of intercourse that follows will be a rape no matter how much consent was given prior to penetration. It follows that if consent is given at the moment of penetration, that act of intercourse will be shielded from being a rape even if consent is later withdrawn during the act.

California case law and statutory law also seem to focus on the moment of penetration as the crucial moment of the crime of rape.

Here is an interesting case.
WHILE ruling that a husband was cruel for forcing his wife to have sex against her will on numerous occasions, a Supreme Court justice has found that “there is no rape in marriage” under Bahamian law.
Wife... Married fifteen years and feeling like a rape victim throughout the marriage.
Husband... waited until marriage to have sex out of respect for his wife, but during the union his sexual needs “were not being met” due to his wife’s job obligations. He said it is his belief that a “wife’s obligation is to have sex with her husband.”


Of course, you may think many lawmakers are "sick sociopath", and many laws need to change.
The thing is, it's not as easy as saying black is black, and white is white, and lawmakers are aware of this.


One girl told the guy she was having sex with, "Stop". Why. She thought one of her parents had come home.
The guy didn't stop. Crying rape isn't going to save her bacon.
Nor will any of that kind of baloney stand up in court.

 

[fantome profane]

Actually, I don't know if you have ever tickled your children.
Did they ever tell you stop? Did you?
When you stopped, did they want you to continue?

I had no idea that is where you were going with that.

But if you are tickling a child and they say stop, stop. If you don't stop it is child abuse.

 

[nPeace]

I had no idea that is where you were going with that.

Yeah. I know. Staring at one side of a coin does that to one.

But if you are tickling a child and they say stop, stop. If you don't stop it is child abuse.

Say what? You're joking right?

 

[fantome profane]

Say what? You're joking right?

No, I am not joking. But I knew you would not understand.

 

[nPeace]

No, I am not joking. But I knew you would not understand.

I do understand.
I understand that you have opinions which you somehow believe is law.
It's not hard for me to figure out why you think so.

You could try an experiment.
You could walk through your town, and tell each neighbor exactly what you told me... "if you are tickling a child and they say stop, stop. If you don't stop it is child abuse."
You could make a note of the results, since I would be interested in them.

 

[Father Heathen]

Oh. Sorry. I didn't realize you said yes to that.
Obviously that is your opinion.
I would like to see you win that case in court.
There are no one sided coins that I am aware of.
You seem to be staring at one side of the coin, and saying that's the whole coin. Flip it, and the other side shows up.


Actually, I don't know if you have ever tickled your children.
Did they ever tell you stop? Did you?
When you stopped, did they want you to continue?

So, I ask again. Did you mean like this...
STOP! STOP!

I'm putting the words to the picture, in case you didn't notice.

Woman tells trial she was in shock during alleged rape

A woman has described how she felt paralysed and her "body and mind went into autopilot" as she was allegedly raped and sexually assaulted by five men.

www.rte.ie

View attachment 77706

Would you like to judge this case?


The facts which show that there are courts in place to prevent frivolous cries of alleged rape.
Try these.

sexual assault case was tossed because the woman didn’t scream during alleged attack
The woman told authorities that the man threatened to not provide her with work if she did not submit to sexual acts, according to the BBC, which cited a report by an Italian newspaper.

The woman said that, perhaps, she should have been more forceful, but “with people who are too strong, I just freeze,” she said, according to the BBC.

Once penetration has occurred with the female's consent, if the female changes her mind does force from that point (where she changes her mind) constitute rape?
These cases point out that the presence or absence of consent at the moment of initial penetration appears to be the crucial point in the crime of rape. For example, if at the moment of penetration the victim has not consented, no amount of consent given thereafter will prevent the act from being a rape. Also, a victim may give consent during preparatory acts all the way up to the moment of penetration, but the victim may withdraw that consent immediately before penetration and if communicated to the perpetrator, the act of intercourse that follows will be a rape no matter how much consent was given prior to penetration. It follows that if consent is given at the moment of penetration, that act of intercourse will be shielded from being a rape even if consent is later withdrawn during the act.

California case law and statutory law also seem to focus on the moment of penetration as the crucial moment of the crime of rape.

Here is an interesting case.
WHILE ruling that a husband was cruel for forcing his wife to have sex against her will on numerous occasions, a Supreme Court justice has found that “there is no rape in marriage” under Bahamian law.
Wife... Married fifteen years and feeling like a rape victim throughout the marriage.
Husband... waited until marriage to have sex out of respect for his wife, but during the union his sexual needs “were not being met” due to his wife’s job obligations. He said it is his belief that a “wife’s obligation is to have sex with her husband.”

Marriage doesn't make rape - i.e. nonconsensual sex - okay, regardless of these disgusting court rulings (no doubt tainted by religious superstition). In some countries, the legal system punishes rape victims for "adultery". However, the corrupt legal systems of primitive societies do not justify such heinous and unjust acts.

...and did you try to compare rape to tickling? Get the **** outta here.

Of course, you may think many lawmakers are "sick sociopath", and many laws need to change.

Of course, they're humans who are fallible and subseptible to corruption. Laws that are irrational and unjustified indeed need to change. Again trash laws made by trash legislators, or trash rulings made by trash judges, do not make rape acceptable. Also, yes, rape apologists lack empathy and humanity, and therefore are indeed sick sociopaths.

The thing is, it's not as easy as saying black is black, and white is white, and lawmakers are aware of this.

But there is no ambiguity when it comes to rape. If someone's penis is in your body and you don't want it in you, that's rape. Period. If someone says no, you don't insert your penis. If someone said yes, but then wants to stop, you pull it out. It's that simple. It doesn't matter that the silly laws of primitive religions or cultures might say otherwise, the civilized world is better than that.

One girl told the guy she was having sex with, "Stop". Why. She thought one of her parents had come home.
The guy didn't stop. Crying rape isn't going to save her bacon.
Nor will any of that kind of baloney stand up in court.

It's her body. It doesn't matter why she said stop. If he defies her wishes, then it's clearly rape.
Calling human decency "boloney" is an example of religious superstition overriding reason and compassion.

No means no. Stop means stop. Period.
You can't just magic away people's bodily autonomy with the wave of a crucifix.
Why are you so adamant about defending rapists anyway? Did you or someone close to you do something?

 

[nPeace]

It's her body. It doesn't matter why she said stop. If he defies her wishes, then it's clearly rape.

In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.
You disagree with this?

Calling human decency "boloney" is an example of religious superstition overriding reason and compassion.

I didn't refer to human decency as baloney.
I know you can read. Right?

No means no. Stop means stop. Period.
You can't just magic away people's bodily autonomy with the wave of a crucifix.
Why are you so adamant about defending rapists anyway? Did you or someone close to you do something?

There you go judging again.
With such a mentality, and you as magistrate, I can see prisons full of men who had casual sex with someone who agreed.

Of course, I don't support sexual immorality, but there are men and women out there, who get involved in casual sex... Not rape, in all cases.
Then the cry of rape is used as a trump card to get at an individual... for one reason, or other.
It happens, doesn't it?

 

[Father Heathen]

In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.
You disagree with this?

What a disgustingly abusive and toxic notion. No, that doesn't justify violating a person's bodily autonomy.

I didn't refer to human decency as baloney.
I know you can read. Right?

You referred to holding rapists accountable as "baloney", faulting instead the victim, which of course is an attack on human decency.

There you go judging again.

Of course I judge those who would victimize the innocent, along with their enablers; I have a sense of justice and morality (one far superior to religious superstition I might add.)

With such a mentality, and you as magistrate, I can see prisons full of men who had casual sex with someone who agreed. Of course, I don't support sexual immorality, but there are men and women out there, who get involved in casual sex... Not rape, in all cases. Then the cry of rape is used as a trump card to get at an individual... for one reason, or other. It happens, doesn't it?

False accusations happen and are inexcusable, yes. But what does that have to do with actual occurrences of rape? Stay on topic.

Nobody is obligated to allow a penis to penetrate them, nor remain inside of them, against their will.

 

[nPeace]

What a disgustingly abusive and toxic notion. No, that doesn't justify violating a person's bodily autonomy.

I thought so.
Your user name doesn't suggest believer, and follower of Christ.
I'm not surprised you disregard what the Bible says for Christians.

You referred to holding rapists accountable as "baloney", faulting instead the victim, which of course is an attack on human decency.

Quote me on that.
I'm sure any gambler could bet his house you can't.
I refered to a foul cry of rape as baloney.

Of course I judge those who would victimize the innocent, along with their enablers; I have a sense of justice and morality (one far superior to religious superstition I might add.)

Using language like the 'F bomb', and other behaviors isn't considered moral, even by many non-believers.

False accusations happen and are inexcusable, yes. But what does that have to do with actual occurrences of rape? Stay on topic.

I'm on topic. You haven't actually described an actual occurrence of rape. You gave your opinion, on what you consider rape.
Others have also.

Nobody is obligated to allow a penis to penetrate them, nor remain inside of them, against their will.

Sure. Just say no... and if the person tries to put it in, scream rape, or just scream your lungs out.
Doing nothing, especially after saying yes, isn't much evidence for the justice system.... Unless you hope they believe whatever people say.
Then that's two people they have to believe. Both would be guilty then.

That question - why didn't you scream? It's a common question, that question and some variation on it, having to do with what the victim did to resist, either physically or verbally, the assault.
The notion that a victim must resist to the utmost or to show earnest resistance or, at the very least, reasonable resistance, all of this was baked into rape law from its origins, frankly. And still today, we see vestiges of that. While most states have moved away from this formal resistance requirement, there are aspects of rape law that continue to put a burden on victims to do something, whether it's physical or verbal, to show their unwillingness.

Respond physically.
Even clear communication is not always effective. Some people simply don't listen or don't care. If either person is intoxicated of high, it may also complicate the situation. However, it is not an excuse for someone to commit sexual assault. If someone is assaulting you and not responding to your objections, you have the right to respond physically or to physically defend yourself if you feel you can do so. If possible, push the person away, scream "No!", and say that you consider what the person is doing to be rape.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What I'm reading is that if a person says no, another person can disregard that and do whatever they please. The standard isn't morality or rights, but whether it will hold up in court.

I'm not familiar with that version of Christian morality that seems to support spousal rape and child abuse.

I don't believe that Christ would have sanctioned this.

 

[Father Heathen]

I thought so.
Your user name doesn't suggest believer, and follower of Christ.
I'm not surprised you disregard what the Bible says for Christians.

Which of Christ's beatitudes greenlighted rape?

Using language like the 'F bomb', and other behaviors isn't considered moral, even by many non-believers.

The concept of profanity is arbitrary nonsense.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Using language like the 'F bomb', and other behaviors isn't considered moral, even by many non-believers.

So using the F-bomb is immoral, but denying that spousal rape is even a thing is fine?

I'm glad I don't follow that kind of "morality." It seems to me focused on superficial appearances over actual substance and well-being of people.

 

[F1fan]

What I'm reading is that if a person says no, another person can disregard that and do whatever they please. The standard isn't morality or rights, but whether it will hold up in court.

I'm not familiar with that version of Christian morality that seems to support spousal rape and child abuse.

I don't believe that Christ would have sanctioned this.

It's consistent with witch trials and then the inevitable execution of being burned to death. Because Jesus loves us. No wonder I find little of value in the Abrahamic religions.

 

[nPeace]

Which of Christ's beatitudes greenlighted rape?

Jesus was a Jew. He knew the law. He knows what rape is, and how it was determined.
Moreover, Jesus was there when God stipulated his law concerning rape.

If you are not sure as to what those laws were, I can suggest you read the Torah... seriously. Or, I can show you.
Don't allow the superficial to mislead you into believing that God stipulated that a virgin marry her rapist. Perhaps read the text again, and talk to Bible students about it.
Neither, God nor Jesus "greenlights" rape... nor fornication - that is consenting to sex with someone you aren't married to.

How did your question come up though? Not that it's not a good question.
I was referring to your disregard what the Bible says for Christians... here.
1 Corinthians 7:4 "For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does."

What were your words... "What a disgustingly abusive and toxic notion."
Is that how you really feel about what an apostle of Jesus said?
I don't think you would have said it, if you didn't mean it.

The concept of profanity is arbitrary nonsense.

I'm not surprised you feel that way, considering what you have shown... but...
Did you know...?
The "concept of profanity", isn't considered "arbitrary nonsense", by Jesus followers - true Christians.

Profanity is actually condemned as worldly behavior that the Christian must strip off, if he or she is to have a relationship with God, and gain his approval. Colossians 3:7-10

That says, in part...
Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry.
because of which things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience,
in which you also once walked when you were living in them.
But now you also put off all these things: anger, rage, malice, slander, foul language out of your mouth.

You can read it in the link below, along with the corresponding Greek words. It's very direct.

Colossians 3 Interlinear Bible

biblehub.com

The Greek word is αἰσχρολογία, - aischrologia, and means abusive language.
Translators used such terms as, filthy language from your lips; dirty language; obscene talk from your mouth; filthy communication out of your mouth;...
The Amplified Bible says...
But now rid yourselves [completely] of all these things: anger, rage, malice, slander, and obscene (abusive, filthy, vulgar) language from your mouth.

Yes, we aren't the first to cuss. The Greeks, and Romans did too. No doubt, the Canaanites, as well.
Regardless of what background we came, the Bible says it's important, we strip off that old person.
Which leads me to wondering, what guides your thinking?
In other words, what do you use as a guide to what is right or wrong... The world? If not the Bible, what?


I am interested in you answer, so don't mind that I want to get back to the rape topic.
Concerning what certain laws stipulate, which I quoted earlier...
... if at the moment of penetration the victim has not consented, no amount of consent given thereafter will prevent the act from being a rape.

Do you believe that if someone forces themselves on another, and the victim after insertion, enjoys the experience, and says yes, yes, yes - consents, that cancels the rape. It's no longer rape?

 

[nPeace]

So using the F-bomb is immoral, but denying that spousal rape is even a thing is fine?

Spousal rape? What's that?

I'm glad I don't follow that kind of "morality." It seems to me focused on superficial appearances over actual substance and well-being of people.

We all have to evaluate and choose things for ourselves. That's life.
The thing is, we have to live with what comes with our choices.

If ever you are interested in discussing, rape, abuse, etc, aside from personal feelings, I'd be more than happy to get into it with you.