| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Pastor Dave" |
| Date: |
23 May 2005 03:15:48 PM |
| Object: |
RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
On Sat, 21 May 2005 18:20:04 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
Pastor Dave wrote:
You have twisted my words and argued against
what I didn't say and now, have come full circle.
I won't bother going around the loop with you
again, since you will do the same thing again.
I have not twisted your words. You plainly said
the victim of a rape could be partially to blame
for being raped, and likened it to someone at
the point of a gun asking to be shot.
What you're doing is fast dance, which you have
a tendency for doing when challenged.
You ignored what I said and responded to something
I didn't say. Now you wish to restate what I did say
and pretend that you responded directly to what I said.
You didn't.
Fact: While a man is holding a gun on someone, keep
antagonizing him and daring him to shoot the person and
when he does, you will find yourself behind bars, even
though you didn't hold the gun, nor pull the trigger.
Fact: While a man is holding a gun on you, keep
antagonizing him and daring him to shoot you. The only
reason you wouldn't find yourself behind bars if he was
holding the gun on you and shot you, is because it's
your body. But rest assured, the police would let you
know how stupid that was and would let you know that
you did play a part in your own shooting. In fact,
they may even "Baker Act" you for three days, for
observation, thinking you may be suicidal. You would
have culpability. It just wouldn't be illegal.
Now take the same two facts above and apply them
to rape. In both cases, you (assuming you are a woman
for a moment) would have some culpability.
Fact: If a woman is dancing naked at a party, for
example and you kept antagonizing the man and
dared the man to rape the woman and he did, you
would be arrested and charged along with him, even
though you are a woman and didn't actually partake
of the rape act.
Fact: If you were the woman dancing naked at a party
and kept antagonizing the man and daring the man to
rape you, you would not be arrested, since it is your
body. But the police would tell you how stupid that
was and you can also rest assured, that no jury would
convict the man. That is because they would recognize
your culpability in your own rape. Not that it is all
your fault. I'm not saying that. But your culpability
would be recognized, as it should be, by any jury. In
fact, they would begin to think that you got exactly
what you were looking for and just changed your mind
the next day, which is what at least some rape
accusations boil down to. I won't argue that with you
and I won't entertain you trying to focus on that one
statement, while ignoring the whole post. It is a
fact. period.
Now you can go on all you want, but the fact is, that
you said that the woman NEVER has ANY fault in their
own rape. Thus, I gave an example that would be easy
to understand and so, yes, my analogy was on spot.
And with that, I'm done with you. Goodbye.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 04:20:37 PM |
|
|
Davey boy must be desparate for someone to answer him.
PLEASE PEOPLE, DO NOT FEED THIS RAPE TROLL!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 05:08:28 PM |
|
|
Zadok wrote:
Davey boy must be desparate for someone to answer him.
PLEASE PEOPLE, DO NOT FEED THIS RAPE TROLL!!
Some people don't understand what logic really is, like liberals.
--
John 14:6-10: Jesus saith unto him: "I am the way, the truth,
and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye
had known me, ye should have known my Father also, and from
henceforth YE KNOW HIM AND HAVE SEEN HIM."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terrell D Lewis" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 09:01:25 PM |
|
|
"Rod" <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194l3j3jicq9bb@corp.supernews.com...
Some people don't understand what logic really is, like liberals.
Jesus was a liberal.
--
Terrell D Lewis
http://www.lastofall.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 09:10:01 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 24 May 2005 02:01:25 GMT, "Terrell D Lewis"
<composer7NOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> spake thusly:
"Rod" <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194l3j3jicq9bb@corp.supernews.com...
Some people don't understand what logic really is, like liberals.
Jesus was a liberal.
No, you are.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 05:30:17 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 23 May 2005 17:08:28 -0500, Rod
<freelance74601@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
Zadok wrote:
Davey boy must be desparate for someone to answer him.
PLEASE PEOPLE, DO NOT FEED THIS RAPE TROLL!!
Some people don't understand what logic really is, like liberals.
They don't get it, because they don't want to get it.
It doesn't suit their purpose. That's why he had
nothing to rebut my points with. Neither did Quartus,
as I'm sure you noticed. :) The fact is, he did argue
against what I did NOT say and now wishes to pretend
that my "original example" showed that the rapist had
100% of the blame, when that is not true.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 03:49:52 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote :
Now you can go on all you want, but the fact is, that
you said that the woman NEVER has ANY fault in their
own rape. Thus, I gave an example that would be easy
to understand and so, yes, my analogy was on spot.
And with that, I'm done with you. Goodbye.
All the points you presented here have been addressed previously, in a
thread that has outlived its usefulness by several days. You have offered
nothing new here, and I would suggest that there is nothing further you
COULD offer.
We can go round and round as many times as you wish, pretending we can
'clear the air' - but we have to face up to the fact that your position on
this is rooted more deeply than could be reached by discussion of this
subject alone.
I very much hope that you do indeed consider this the end of this tired
'discussion'. Nothing would be gained from the creation of any further
threads on this.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Quartus" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 05:05:30 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
You ignored what I said and responded to something
I didn't say. Now you wish to restate what I did say
and pretend that you responded directly to what I said.
You didn't.
For someone who calls themselves a pastor, you sure can do a fast dance.
Of course I responded to exactly what you _originally_ said.
Fact: While a man is holding a gun on someone, keep
antagonizing him and daring him to shoot the person and
when he does, you will find yourself behind bars, even
though you didn't hold the gun, nor pull the trigger.
That's not what the woman you originally described is doing; it's not
analogous. You tried to make it analogous but it's just plain silly.
Fact: While a man is holding a gun on you, keep
antagonizing him and daring him to shoot you. The only
reason you wouldn't find yourself behind bars if he was
holding the gun on you and shot you, is because it's
your body. But rest assured, the police would let you
know how stupid that was and would let you know that
you did play a part in your own shooting. In fact,
they may even "Baker Act" you for three days, for
observation, thinking you may be suicidal. You would
have culpability. It just wouldn't be illegal.
That's not what the woman you originally described is doing. It's not
analogous.
Now take the same two facts above and apply them
to rape. In both cases, you (assuming you are a woman
for a moment) would have some culpability.
Your examples were not analogous. Their extreme, and ridiculous.
Fact: If a woman is dancing naked at a party, for
example and you kept antagonizing the man and
dared the man to rape the woman and he did, you
would be arrested and charged along with him, even
though you are a woman and didn't actually partake
of the rape act.
That's not what the woman you originally described was doing. You've now
changed your original example to much more extreme behavior.
That's why I said you are doing a fast dance.
Fact: If you were the woman dancing naked at a party
and kept antagonizing the man and daring the man to
rape you, you would not be arrested, since it is your
body. But the police would tell you how stupid that
was and you can also rest assured, that no jury would
convict the man. That is because they would recognize
your culpability in your own rape. Not that it is all
your fault. I'm not saying that. But your culpability
would be recognized, as it should be, by any jury. In
fact, they would begin to think that you got exactly
what you were looking for and just changed your mind
the next day, which is what at least some rape
accusations boil down to. I won't argue that with you
and I won't entertain you trying to focus on that one
statement, while ignoring the whole post. It is a
fact. period.
That's not what the woman you initially described was doing. You're now
changing your story.
Now you can go on all you want, but the fact is, that
you said that the woman NEVER has ANY fault in their
own rape. Thus, I gave an example that would be easy
to understand and so, yes, my analogy was on spot.
The fault for raping a woman lies with the rapist in your original
example. Stop trying to change your story to some ridiculous extreme
scenario.
And stop trying to fasten the blame for your sinful lust upon women.
And with that, I'm done with you. Goodbye.
I'm not surprised, "Pastor".
I suspect you have issues with lusting after women, and are trying to
excuse yourself by partially blaming them. What comes out of your heart
is wholly your own sin. Judge yourself, and leave the woman to God.
Quartus, a brother
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 05:26:35 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 23 May 2005 18:05:30 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
Fact: While a man is holding a gun on someone, keep
antagonizing him and daring him to shoot the person and
when he does, you will find yourself behind bars, even
though you didn't hold the gun, nor pull the trigger.
That's not what the woman you originally described is doing; it's not
analogous. You tried to make it analogous but it's just plain silly.
I did not say it was. That's why I titled this thread,
"Let's clear the air". I gave an easy example this
time, so all could readily understand it.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 06:02:00 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 23 May 2005 18:05:30 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
I wasn't going to respond to you any more, but I'll
defend myself against your accusation.
Pastor Dave wrote:
You ignored what I said and responded to something
I didn't say. Now you wish to restate what I did say
and pretend that you responded directly to what I said.
You didn't.
For someone who calls themselves a pastor, you sure
can do a fast dance.
Of course I responded to exactly what you _originally_ said.
Sure you did. See below.
Now you can go on all you want, but the fact is, that
you said that the woman NEVER has ANY fault in their
own rape. Thus, I gave an example that would be easy
to understand and so, yes, my analogy was on spot.
The fault for raping a woman lies with the rapist in your
original example.
So you didn't change the scenario at all and responded
to EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, huh? Let's take a look at it
and see.
*****************************************************************
Pastor Dave: Sometimes a rape is partially the fault of
the person raped. Do you really think women can run
around with next to nothing on, talk like sluts, go to
places where they know lots of drugs and drinking is
going on, tease men (which they do) and then expect
that no man is ever going to try to take it from them?
Please! That's like standing in front of someone with
a gun pointed at you and doing your best to convince
him to shoot you and then, when he does, claiming that
you had no part in the shooting.
Quartus: That's kinda like partially blaming the devil
for the sins we commit, because he hangs the temptation
in front of us.
Pastor Dave: No, it isn't. The devil isn't the one
committing our sins. The girl is however, committing
sins.
Quartus: So the Devil is not committing sins when he
tempts us?
Pastor Dave: I said he is not committing OUR sins.
Quartus: And neither is the rape victim committing the
sins of the rapist.
Pastor Dave: She is however, committing her own sins,
if she is contributing to the problem.
Quartus: Which statement is different than partially
blaming the victim for the rapist's sins.
Quartus: Not even an unregenerate judge would
countenance a excuse poffered by a man guilty of rape,
'Judge, I'm only partly guilty because she was tempting
me.'
Pastor Dave: You have twisted my words and argued
against what I didn't say and now, have come full
circle. I won't bother going around the loop with you
again, since you will do the same thing again.
***************************************************************
It is clear that you moved the focus from my point
about how a woman can be PARTIALLY responsible,
to a conversation about the rapist's guilt, when no one
said that he had no guilt and you then misused the
scenario regarding the Devil, which YOU created.
You then went on to talk about a woman "tempting" a
man, when my example was more extreme than that.
"Tempting" can be merely wearing makeup, or a skirt
above the knee. I'm not saying it's wrong to do that,
but "tempting" and running around with next to nothing
on, are two different things AND YOU KNOW THAT.
You also know that what you said, is not the same as
what I said. It is clear that you watered down my
example and tried to direct attention away from the
woman who is a ***** and does the things I described in
my quote above, who was the subject of my statement.
I said the following (which is also quoted above)...
"Do you really think women can run around with next to
nothing on, talk like sluts, go to places where they
know lots of drugs and drinking is going on, tease men
(which they do) and then expect that no man is ever
going to try to take it from them?"
The logical answer is, "No". Do you know how I know
that is the logical answer? because women like that
tend to get raped a lot more often.
And stop trying to fasten the blame for your
sinful lust upon women.
And once again, you perform the art of misdirection.
Now you want everyone to focus on me and blame
me for the situation and you wish to accuse me of
having a rapist mentality, which is what we both know
you are implying.
You are a liar, a pervert and a sick individual.
And with that, I'm done with you. Goodbye.
I'm not surprised, "Pastor".
I suspect you have issues with lusting after women, and are trying to
excuse yourself by partially blaming them. What comes out of your heart
is wholly your own sin. Judge yourself, and leave the woman to God.
Thank you for proving my point.
Quartus, a brother
When you find yourself defending the actions of sluts,
it's time to check your beliefs.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "Quartus" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 07:24:41 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
I wasn't going to respond to you any more, but I'll
defend myself against your accusation.
Interesting. I didn't really have the last word after all. But, by all
means, defend yourself.
*****************************************************************
Pastor Dave: Sometimes a rape is partially the fault of
the person raped. Do you really think women can run
around with next to nothing on, talk like sluts, go to
places where they know lots of drugs and drinking is
going on, tease men (which they do) and then expect
that no man is ever going to try to take it from them?
Please! That's like standing in front of someone with
a gun pointed at you and doing your best to convince
him to shoot you and then, when he does, claiming that
you had no part in the shooting.
Quartus: That's kinda like partially blaming the devil
for the sins we commit, because he hangs the temptation
in front of us.
Pastor Dave: No, it isn't. The devil isn't the one
committing our sins. The girl is however, committing
sins.
Quartus: So the Devil is not committing sins when he
tempts us?
Pastor Dave: I said he is not committing OUR sins.
Quartus: And neither is the rape victim committing the
sins of the rapist.
Pastor Dave: She is however, committing her own sins,
if she is contributing to the problem.
Quartus: Which statement is different than partially
blaming the victim for the rapist's sins.
Quartus: Not even an unregenerate judge would
countenance a excuse poffered by a man guilty of rape,
'Judge, I'm only partly guilty because she was tempting
me.'
Pastor Dave: You have twisted my words and argued
against what I didn't say and now, have come full
circle. I won't bother going around the loop with you
again, since you will do the same thing again.
***************************************************************
It is clear that you moved the focus from my point
about how a woman can be PARTIALLY responsible,
to a conversation about the rapist's guilt, when no one
said that he had no guilt and you then misused the
scenario regarding the Devil, which YOU created.
It's not a question of the rapist having no guilt. It's your attempt to
shift part of the blame for his sin off on another.
I said it's like partly blaming the devil when he tempts me and then I
commit a sin. The woman tempts the man so she must take part of the
blame for being raped. The devil tempted me so he must take part of my
blame.
Maybe we don't under stand what 'partially to blame' means. I'd say the
devil was partially guilty, say 20%, and I am 80%. The rapist is 80%
guilty and the woman 20%, depending, of course, how little or much she
was wearing.
You then went on to talk about a woman "tempting" a
man, when my example was more extreme than that.
"Tempting" can be merely wearing makeup, or a skirt
above the knee. I'm not saying it's wrong to do that,
but "tempting" and running around with next to nothing
on, are two different things AND YOU KNOW THAT.
Ah! The woman in your example was perhaps 80% partially guilty, and the
rapist 20%. I get it now. We are talking about one rape and apportioning
the blame between the perpetrator and victim.
You also know that what you said, is not the same as
what I said. It is clear that you watered down my
example and tried to direct attention away from the
woman who is a ***** and does the things I described in
my quote above, who was the subject of my statement.
The problem with your view is that inherent in it is the belief that the
woman (partially?) has the rape coming, deserves it, because she was, in
effect, asking for it.
I said the following (which is also quoted above)...
"Do you really think women can run around with next to
nothing on, talk like sluts, go to places where they
know lots of drugs and drinking is going on, tease men
(which they do) and then expect that no man is ever
going to try to take it from them?"
The logical answer is, "No". Do you know how I know
that is the logical answer? because women like that
tend to get raped a lot more often.
I think they have every right not to be raped.
And stop trying to fasten the blame for your
sinful lust upon women.
And once again, you perform the art of misdirection.
Now you want everyone to focus on me and blame
me for the situation and you wish to accuse me of
having a rapist mentality, which is what we both know
you are implying.
Nope, I never implied you were a rapist, or had the mentality of a
rapist. You do appear to have issues with lusting after women if you
want to blame them for being raped.
Really Dave, be honest. You may use an extreme example, but your belief
about women tempting men carries across to much less provocation than
what you have described in your example. You like to make a big splash
with your bold, sweeping example.
You are a liar, a pervert and a sick individual.
Dave, in my experience, the men running around crying about women
tempting them usually have issues with lust.
When you find yourself defending the actions of sluts,
it's time to check your beliefs.
Here, I'll cut and paste my own words for you:
The fault for raping a woman lies with the rapist in your
original example.
Nice one though. You succeeded in getting Rod on that one, but know that
the enemy of Rod's enemy is his friend, and he's not happy with me right
now.
I'm not defending the actions of the women. My point, and the one you
are bent in turning aside, is that a you cannot hold a woman partly to
blame in a rape.
Your point is, and I quote, "Sometimes a rape is partially the fault of
the person raped."
Quartus, a brother
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
23 May 2005 09:05:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 23 May 2005 20:24:41 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
It is clear that you moved the focus from my point
about how a woman can be PARTIALLY responsible,
to a conversation about the rapist's guilt, when no one
said that he had no guilt and you then misused the
scenario regarding the Devil, which YOU created.
It's not a question of the rapist having no guilt. It's your attempt to
shift part of the blame for his sin off on another.
It is an issue of blaming the rapist for his actions
and recognizing that not all women are completely
innocent in the event.
As I said...
"Do you really think women can run around with next to
nothing on, talk like sluts, go to places where they
know lots of drugs and drinking is going on, tease men
(which they do) and then expect that no man is ever
going to try to take it from them?"
The logical answer is, "No". Do you know how I know
that is the logical answer? because women like that
tend to get raped a lot more often.
I think they have every right not to be raped.
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing. That is why the victim is
always examined in the minds of the jury. There is a
point where it becomes unreasonable to expect the
average man to resist. As an extreme example, if a
woman rubs up against a man while she's naked (as
some of the women have said they should be able to do),
women think the man should do nothing. The reality is,
she can kiss it goodbye and no jury will convict the
man. Why? I'll tell you why. Because SHE IS
partially to blame FOR HER OWN RAPE.
Now you can believe that, or not believe it. I don't
care. It is the truth.
And with that, I am truly, this time, done.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "Quartus" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
24 May 2005 06:36:51 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing. That is why the victim is
always examined in the minds of the jury. There is a
point where it becomes unreasonable to expect the
average man to resist. As an extreme example, if a
woman rubs up against a man while she's naked (as
some of the women have said they should be able to do),
women think the man should do nothing. The reality is,
she can kiss it goodbye and no jury will convict the
man. Why? I'll tell you why. Because SHE IS
partially to blame FOR HER OWN RAPE.
Oh please. You get more bizarre with every post, Dave. How far afield
you have now gone in your futile attempt to defend yourself for trying
to victimize a victim of rape.
You're still dancing very fast.
My point is, and always was, that you are attempting to make the rapist
less than 100 percent guilty for his actions. In short, you are excusing
sin.
I love this one:
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing.
And so, with the stroke of the pen, the "pastor" excuses sin.
There is a
point where it becomes unreasonable to expect the
average man to resist.
I bet you'd like to set that point too. We usually set it at the point
at which we've crossed the line ourselves.
And with that, I am truly, this time, done.
Really?
Quartus, a brother
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
24 May 2005 09:38:26 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 24 May 2005 07:36:51 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
I am not continuing this argument. I am simply
clarifying.
Pastor Dave wrote:
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing. That is why the victim is
always examined in the minds of the jury. There is a
point where it becomes unreasonable to expect the
average man to resist. As an extreme example, if a
woman rubs up against a man while she's naked (as
some of the women have said they should be able to do),
women think the man should do nothing. The reality is,
she can kiss it goodbye and no jury will convict the
man. Why? I'll tell you why. Because SHE IS
partially to blame FOR HER OWN RAPE.
Oh please. You get more bizarre with every post, Dave.
Actually, FYI, I posted that example a near the
beginning of the whole rape issue discussions.
My point is, and always was, that you are attempting
to make the rapist less than 100 percent guilty for his
actions. In short, you are excusing sin.
I said, "SOMETIMES she is PARTIALLY to blame".
I have never said, "ALWAYS".
I love this one:
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing.
And so, with the stroke of the pen, the "pastor" excuses sin.
I did no such thing. I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "Quartus" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
24 May 2005 10:31:28 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
My point is, and always was, that you are attempting
to make the rapist less than 100 percent guilty for his
actions. In short, you are excusing sin.
I said, "SOMETIMES she is PARTIALLY to blame".
I have never said, "ALWAYS".
That's not in dispute, nor does it negate what I wrote.
I love this one:
There is a line that the average man should not be
expected to avoid crossing.
And so, with the stroke of the pen, the "pastor" excuses sin.
I did no such thing.
Yea you did. When you say that there comes a point when a man cannot be
expected not to sin, you've begun excusing his sin.
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim is
partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will decide.
Quartus, a brother
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
24 May 2005 11:08:11 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:31:28 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim is
partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 12:15:58 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:31:28 -0400, Quartus
<quartus_a_brother@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim is
partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
I can't believe this thread! 'Pastor' Dave, I have read many of your
posts, and I disagree with your interpretation of certain scripture,
but, this takes the cake! How can you possibly, as a 'Christian', state
that a woman who is raped is "partially responsible"? You talk about
women who wear revealing clothing, flirt, and tease... that's certainly
a majority of women in the USA. You talk about the 'line' that the
'average man' will cross, if tempted by one of these "sluts". Are you
'average', Dave? Have you crossed that line, and feel the need to
justify YOUR sin? Try this scenario: Your teenage daughter has been
seeing a young man for some time. One night, their kisses, cuddling, and
vows of undying love get to the point where she is ready to give herself
to him, and 'become a woman'. They disrobe, and, just before the 'act',
your daughter has a change of heart ("wait, what am I thinking, I want
to save myself for marriage"). The young man, in his lust, says "oh, no
you don't!", and has his way with her. Would you tell your daughter that
she "had it coming"? Would you tell her that she shouldn't have acted
like a *****? Or, would you want to hurt that young man? When does 'no'
not mean no? Let's say they had been drinking, and your daughter wasn't
coherent enough to say no; she was passed out when she was raped. Does
that excuse the rapist? After all, she didn't say no.
And, do me a favor, 'Pastor', don't tell me "My daughter would
never...", because you don't know what could happen. I've been a father
far too long; I know the '15 going on 25' syndrome. Children don't
always do as they are taught.
Every one of your 'rebuttals' in this thread is ludicrous; you present a
scenario of someone 'goading' a gunman into shooting him; why is the
person wielding the gun in the first place? If I 'goad' a mugger into
shooting me, what does it matter if I might have suicidal tendancies?
HE'S the one who pulled the gun! Why does my mental instability excuse
any portion of his sin? Does the Bible say "Thou shalt not kill (unless
you are encouraged)"? Sheesh.
You mentioned, I believe, "if a woman rubs up against a man while she's
naked (as some of the women have said they should be able to do), women
think the man should do nothing. The reality is, she can kiss it
goodbye and no jury will convict the man. Why? I'll tell you why.
Because SHE IS partially to blame FOR HER OWN RAPE." What a jackass. I
have been with women, who have changed their mind at the last second,
Dave, and I didn't rape them. Even before I was saved, I knew that 'no'
means no.
RAS
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 12:43:12 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Try this scenario: Your teenage daughter has been
seeing a young man for some time. One night, their kisses, cuddling, and
vows of undying love get to the point where she is ready to give herself
to him, and 'become a woman'. They disrobe, and, just before the 'act',
your daughter has a change of heart ("wait, what am I thinking, I want
to save myself for marriage"). The young man, in his lust, says "oh, no
you don't!", and has his way with her. Would you tell your daughter that
she "had it coming"?
Liberals are great at trying to get you to ask and
respond to the wrong questions.
My question would be, why didn't you raise your
daughter better than that? It's obvious that she
hasn't been raised in a Godly fashion.
I think some self examination as a parent is in order
there. But hey, let me guess... It doesn't matter
what you do as a parent... it's not your fault in way,
right?
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 12:44:16 PM |
|
|
Hey, Dave, when did the Jews come out of Babylon and rebuild the temple?
Jer 29:10 For thus saith the LORD, That AFTER seventy years be accomplished
at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing
you to RETURN to this place.
Ike
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 06:01:56 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Try this scenario: Your teenage daughter has been
seeing a young man for some time. One night, their kisses, cuddling, and
vows of undying love get to the point where she is ready to give herself
to him, and 'become a woman'. They disrobe, and, just before the 'act',
your daughter has a change of heart ("wait, what am I thinking, I want
to save myself for marriage"). The young man, in his lust, says "oh, no
you don't!", and has his way with her. Would you tell your daughter that
she "had it coming"?
Liberals are great at trying to get you to ask and
respond to the wrong questions.
My question would be, why didn't you raise your
daughter better than that? It's obvious that she
hasn't been raised in a Godly fashion.
I think some self examination as a parent is in order
there. But hey, let me guess... It doesn't matter
what you do as a parent... it's not your fault in way,
right?
You are grossly mistaken, pal. I am about as right-wing as anyone can
be, a subscriber to The Limbaugh Letter, and a staunch Republican. The
fact of the matter is; you are, once again, weaseling out of answering a
question that you don't like. I don't care how Godly you raise children,
there comes a time in their lives when they want, and need to affirm
their own adulthood. Teenage hormones, combined with little life
experience, sometimes causes the most well-raised children to make poor
decisions. If you think otherwise, you are sadly ignorant about real life.
I notice you didn't bother to answer my other question: have you crossed
that line, Dave? Is your lame attempt at putting blame on the vicim of a
crime your way to absolve yourself of guilt for a past trangression? Do
you lust after women in your heart, 'pastor'?
How about the guy with the gun? You also ignored my point about your
analogy. Why should the victim of a shooting be blamed, even if he did
'goad' the shooter?
You don't want to have a dicussion, or a civilized debate, 'pastor'; you
only want to spout your interpretation of scripture, and voice your
opinion. Anyone who questions you, or disagrees with your viewpoint is a
"liberal", or a "false Christian". You have become a legend in your own
mind.
RAS
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 06:26:47 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:01:56 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Try this scenario: Your teenage daughter has been
seeing a young man for some time. One night, their kisses, cuddling, and
vows of undying love get to the point where she is ready to give herself
to him, and 'become a woman'. They disrobe, and, just before the 'act',
your daughter has a change of heart ("wait, what am I thinking, I want
to save myself for marriage"). The young man, in his lust, says "oh, no
you don't!", and has his way with her. Would you tell your daughter that
she "had it coming"?
Liberals are great at trying to get you to ask and
respond to the wrong questions.
My question would be, why didn't you raise your
daughter better than that? It's obvious that she
hasn't been raised in a Godly fashion.
I think some self examination as a parent is in order
there. But hey, let me guess... It doesn't matter
what you do as a parent... it's not your fault in way,
right?
You are grossly mistaken, pal.
Okay, so nothing is your fault. Gotcha.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 09:09:04 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:01:56 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
Try this scenario: Your teenage daughter has been
seeing a young man for some time. One night, their kisses, cuddling, and
vows of undying love get to the point where she is ready to give herself
to him, and 'become a woman'. They disrobe, and, just before the 'act',
your daughter has a change of heart ("wait, what am I thinking, I want
to save myself for marriage"). The young man, in his lust, says "oh, no
you don't!", and has his way with her. Would you tell your daughter that
she "had it coming"?
Liberals are great at trying to get you to ask and
respond to the wrong questions.
My question would be, why didn't you raise your
daughter better than that? It's obvious that she
hasn't been raised in a Godly fashion.
I think some self examination as a parent is in order
there. But hey, let me guess... It doesn't matter
what you do as a parent... it's not your fault in way,
right?
You are grossly mistaken, pal.
Okay, so nothing is your fault. Gotcha.
Let's put my entire reply back, Davie, since you've seen fit to snip it,
in keeping with your dihonest ways:
You are grossly mistaken, pal. I am about as right-wing as anyone can be, a subscriber to The Limbaugh Letter, and a staunch Republican. The fact of the matter is; you are, once again, weaseling out of answering a question that you don't like. I don't care how Godly you raise children, there comes a time in their lives when they want, and need to affirm their own adulthood. Teenage hormones, combined with little life experience, sometimes causes the most well-raised children to make poor decisions. If you think otherwise, you are sadly ignorant about real life.
I notice you didn't bother to answer my other question: have you crossed that line, Dave? Is your lame attempt at putting blame on the vicim of a crime your way to absolve yourself of guilt for a past trangression? Do you lust after women in your heart, 'pastor'?
How about the guy with the gun? You also ignored my point about your analogy. Why should the victim of a shooting be blamed, even if he did 'goad' the shooter?
You don't want to have a dicussion, or a civilized debate, 'pastor'; you only want to spout your interpretation of scripture, and voice your opinion. Anyone who questions you, or disagrees with your viewpoint is a "liberal", or a "false Christian". You have become a legend in your own mind.
RAS
Now, you still have not answered a single question from my original post
in this thread, and you continue to ignore every point I've made. I
realize, that when dishonest people are 'backed into a corner', they
tend to change the subject, use ad homium arguments, and generally
abandon their original lost cause. You seem to fit the profile well,
'pastor'. And, what church were you ordained by? You can answer that
question, at least, can't you?
RAS
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 12:40:08 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim is
partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
I can't believe this thread! 'Pastor' Dave,
So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then intentionally step
into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in your
own death?
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 01:17:52 PM |
|
|
Hey there "pastor" Dave, when did the Jews come up out of Babylon and
rebuild the temple?
Jer 29:10 For thus saith the LORD, That AFTER seventy years be accomplished
at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing
you to RETURN to this place.
Ike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 02:45:38 PM |
|
|
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr. wrote:
Hey there "pastor" Dave, when did the Jews come up out of Babylon and
rebuild the temple?
Jer 29:10 For thus saith the LORD, That AFTER seventy years be accomplished
at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing
you to RETURN to this place.
Ike
What you're doing is spam, and on supernews, it's grounds for
cancelling your account. If you don't stop, I will complain !
--
John 14:6-10: Jesus saith unto him: "I am the way, the truth,
and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye
had known me, ye should have known my Father also, and from
henceforth YE KNOW HIM AND HAVE SEEN HIM."
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 06:10:39 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim is
partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
I can't believe this thread! 'Pastor' Dave,
So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then intentionally step
into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in your
own death?
Do you even realize how utterly stupid your analogies are getting?
Firstly, WHY is the bus driver 'aiming for me'? Wouldn't attempting to
run someone down be a criminal act? Who initiated that act? What if I
have suicidal tendancies, and I decide, at that moment, to get it over
with; do I, a mentally ill person, share the blame for my death with a
crazed bus driver? What if my back was turned when the bus driver aimed
for me? HE was still going to commit the crime! Get better material,
'pastor'.
RAS
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 07:39:49 PM |
|
|
RAS wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim
is partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will
decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
I can't believe this thread! 'Pastor' Dave,
So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then intentionally step
into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in your
own death?
Do you even realize how utterly stupid your analogies are getting?
How can they be termed stupid when one is trying to put forth
a workable example ? Over the years we've seen several very good
examples of out of control people on cop shows, like then one
with the former sheriff of Orange County California as host.
Firstly, WHY is the bus driver 'aiming for me'?
Good question ! Remember the video clip of that screwball
that stole the tank and was hauling down ventura blvd as
fast as the tank would go, just to end up trying to run
down some pedestrians in west LA and driving over several
RV's and cars ? You can ask him, if you're still breathing !
Wouldn't attempting to
run someone down be a criminal act? Who initiated that act? What if I
have suicidal tendancies, and I decide, at that moment, to get it over
with; do I, a mentally ill person, share the blame for my death with a
crazed bus driver?
Yes, I'm afraid that you do. Suicidal tendencies, mental illness, and
alcohol allways seem to get the rap for things they didn't do. You
MADE a conscious decision to step in front of a moving bus under the
control of a crazed bus driver. YOUR decision, your thought processes
initiated movement that direction, PROVING a conscious decision on
your part. The excuse that alcohol, drugs and mental illness motivated
you to get yourself killed is hogwash. Alcohol, drugs and mental
illness cannot initiate conscious thought, only the you can do that.
What if my back was turned when the bus driver aimed
for me?
Why were you in the path of his travel ? Did someone
push you into the street ? Are you looking to blame your
mental illness for your stupidity ?
HE was still going to commit the crime! Get better material,
'pastor'.
RAS
--
John 14:6-10: Jesus saith unto him: "I am the way, the truth,
and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye
had known me, ye should have known my Father also, and from
henceforth YE KNOW HIM AND HAVE SEEN HIM."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 07:47:05 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:39:49 -0500, Rod
<freelance74601@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
What if my back was turned when the bus driver aimed
for me?
Why were you in the path of his travel ? Did someone
push you into the street ? Are you looking to blame your
mental illness for your stupidity ?
Note that he tries to twist my example into one in
which he isn't looking. That's because he has no
rebuttal for what I actually did say, which as you
know, was as follows...
"So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then *_INTENTIONALLY_*
step into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in
your own death?"
I added emphasis on the appropriate word, when quoting.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.
|
|
|
| User: "Quartus" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
26 May 2005 06:52:05 AM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
"So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then *_INTENTIONALLY_*
step into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in
your own death?"
The rapist is a bus, which rapist-bus aims for the rape victim who is
the pedestrian. The rape-victim-pedestrian sees the rapist-bus coming
right for them, to rape/run-over them, so the rape-victim-pedestrian
_INTENTIONALLY_ steps into the path of the rapist-bus and presumably
gets raped/run-over by the rapist-bus.
So let's see, a woman sees a rapist, and understands that he's a rapist,
and understands his intent to rape her, so she _INTENTIONALLY_ heads in
his direction. And this is the explanation of how a woman is partly to
blame for her rape.
The examples keep getting more bizarre. It's all misdirection, Dave, and
in no way analogous to a rape.
I added emphasis on the appropriate word, when quoting.
Me too.
Quartus, a brother
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 08:48:30 PM |
|
|
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:39:49 -0500, Rod
<freelance74601@yahoo.com> spake thusly:
What if my back was turned when the bus driver aimed
for me?
Why were you in the path of his travel ? Did someone
push you into the street ? Are you looking to blame your
mental illness for your stupidity ?
Note that he tries to twist my example into one in
which he isn't looking. That's because he has no
rebuttal for what I actually did say, which as you
know, was as follows...
"So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then *_INTENTIONALLY_*
step into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in
your own death?"
I added emphasis on the appropriate word, when quoting.
And you, 'pastor' have no rebuttal for my original post in this thread,
which is why you change the subject, and weasel your way out of
answering my questions. Even with this screwball analogy, you fail to
answer why I have any culpability, if the bus driver is AIMING HIS BUS
AT ME! What if I'm just too slow to get out of his way? Am I at fault,
for being old and slow? You have already stated that the driver was
AIMING AT ME; I don't have to "step into the bus' path".
I added emphasis to the appropriate words, when quoting. And, I don't
expect any coherent reply from you, Davie; I see how you like to avoid
questions that are too difficult.
RAS
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RAS" |
|
| Title: Re: RAPE - LET'S CLEAR THE AIR |
25 May 2005 08:56:05 PM |
|
|
Rod wrote:
RAS wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2005 01:15:58 -0400, RAS
<rstrub@rocketmail.com> spake thusly:
I have always maintained that the
rapist is guilty of the rapists sins.
But not 100% guilty. The rapist is partially guilty and the victim
is partially guilty, under certain circumstances which you will
decide.
Once again, you twist my words. I told you,
we're done!
I can't believe this thread! 'Pastor' Dave,
So if a bus is coming and you see the bus coming and
the driver aims for you and you then intentionally step
into the bus' path, you have no responsibility in your
own death?
Do you even realize how utterly stupid your analogies are getting?
How can they be termed stupid when one is trying to put forth
a workable example ? Over the years we've seen several very good
examples of out of control people on cop shows, like then one
with the former sheriff of Orange County California as host.
Firstly, WHY is the bus driver 'aiming for me'?
Good question ! Remember the video clip of that screwball
that stole the tank and was hauling down ventura blvd as
fast as the tank would go, just to end up trying to run
down some pedestrians in west LA and driving over several
RV's and cars ? You can ask him, if you're still breathing !
Wouldn't attempting to
run someone down be a criminal act? Who initiated that act? What if I
have suicidal tendancies, and I decide, at that moment, to get it over
with; do I, a mentally ill person, share the blame for my death with a
crazed bus driver?
Yes, I'm afraid that you do. Suicidal tendencies, mental illness, and
alcohol allways seem to get the rap for things they didn't do. You
MADE a conscious decision to step in front of a moving bus under the
control of a crazed bus driver. YOUR decision, your thought processes
initiated movement that direction, PROVING a conscious decision on
your part. The excuse that alcohol, drugs and mental illness motivated
you to get yourself killed is hogwash. Alcohol, drugs and mental
illness cannot initiate conscious thought, only the you can do that.
What if my back was turned when the bus driver aimed
for me?
Why were you in the path of his travel ? Did someone
push you into the street ? Are you looking to blame your
mental illness for your stupidity ?
Um, read the good 'pastor's' analogy, Rod. The bus driver is AIMING AT
ME! Hell, I'm on the sidewalk, like any good citizen. As 'pastor' Dave's
peanut gallery and cheering section, you are doing a fine job. As a
supposed thinking, intelligent individual, your defense of his twisted
idea that a woman is "partially responsible" for being raped, or a
person is "partially responsible" for being shot, is simply ridiculous.
RAS
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
