Religions > Bible > Re: Glenn Contradicts Himself About Rape Accusation!
| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Glenn \Christian Mystic" |
| Date: |
10 Oct 2006 12:18:27 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Glenn Contradicts Himself About Rape Accusation! |
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12ih676s04ks1a7@corp.supernews.com...
Giant Waffle wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 18:35:28 -0700, oldwetdog
<g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> you decided to say:
<snip>
Let it be noted right here, that Glenn claims that he did NOT
clip my words, yet, that's exactly what he did do!
My statement went as follows...
GW: "However, if she said no and then I took her by force,
then we both have sinned. Her for saying no and me
for assaulting my wife."
Exactly, thanks, Dave ;-)
I LIKE your statement, Dave, I wouldn't do anything to remove any of it.
Dave, you admit that "assaulting" your wife is wrong, or that it is "sin".
Fine,
But you claim the "RIGHT" to do so,
Where, and when did he do this ?
and just change the name of your conduct to "assault."
Where, and when ?
Dave, what the whole world defines as "RAPE" is "sex by force" OR "sex by
ASSAULT." owd:
If your wife wishes to abstain from sex for a period of prayer and
fasting, and YOU do _NOT_ give YOUR consent, DO YOU HAVE THE GOD-GIVEN
RIGHT TO HAVE SEX WITH HER?
Randy:
Yes,
Note the attributes, Randy's "Yes" is to something said in an earlier post,
the above is clearly a twisting of what was said.
By claiming you have the God-given right, by claiming there is no rape in
marriage, you (Randy and Dave) both are endorsing, excusing, advocating
and promoting spousal rape.
IF that what he was saying "Yes" to (but we don't know what he was saying
"Yes" to)
EOD
.
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: Glenn Contradicts Himself About Rape Accusation! |
10 Oct 2006 01:04:29 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:18:27 -0500,
in article <12inksces6tgb5@corp.supernews.com>,
"Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)" <christianmystic@ev1.net> wrote:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12ih676s04ks1a7@corp.supernews.com...
Giant Waffle wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 18:35:28 -0700, oldwetdog
<g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> you decided to say:
<snip>
Let it be noted right here, that Glenn claims that he did NOT
clip my words, yet, that's exactly what he did do!
My statement went as follows...
GW: "However, if she said no and then I took her by force,
then we both have sinned. Her for saying no and me
for assaulting my wife."
Exactly, thanks, Dave ;-)
I LIKE your statement, Dave, I wouldn't do anything to remove any of it.
Dave, you admit that "assaulting" your wife is wrong, or that it is "sin".
Fine,
But you claim the "RIGHT" to do so,
Where, and when did he do this ?
He did not. But thanks for having enough integrity to at least ask
him to produce a quote. Owd is arguing from the premise that if your
spouse has a right to "due" benevolence ("sex"), that means they must
and will force that right against your wishes (as if "due"
benevolence, of necessity, means "forced" benevolence), then claims we
endorse forced sex on that basis. See his lie?
and just change the name of your conduct to "assault."
Where, and when ?
He calls it "our conduct". Neither of us has assaulted our spouse, or
ever endorsed it, or claimed it is anything other than wrong.
Dave, what the whole world defines as "RAPE" is "sex by force" OR "sex by
ASSAULT." owd:
If your wife wishes to abstain from sex for a period of prayer and
fasting, and YOU do _NOT_ give YOUR consent, DO YOU HAVE THE GOD-GIVEN
RIGHT TO HAVE SEX WITH HER?
Randy:
Yes,
Note the attributes, Randy's "Yes" is to something said in an earlier post,
the above is clearly a twisting of what was said.
By claiming you have the God-given right, by claiming there is no rape in
marriage, you (Randy and Dave) both are endorsing, excusing, advocating
and promoting spousal rape.
IF that what he was saying "Yes" to (but we don't know what he was saying
"Yes" to)
Notice what he is asking. He is not asking if you have the God given
right to force sex against your spouses wishes (which we everywhere
renounce, and he has admitted), he is asking if you have a right to
due benevolence (sex), if your spouse does not consent. When you
agree a spouse always has the right to "due" benevolence (sex), he
then tries to confuse the right to what is "due", with the right to
take that by force.
Here's how it actually went:
Owd's Original post:
12i5tbgjd7f4l56@corp.supernews.com
Tell us ALL, Randy: Tell us ONE MORE TIME, AGAIN!!
If your wife wishes to abstain from sex for a period of prayer and
fasting, and YOU do _NOT_ give YOUR consent, DO YOU HAVE THE GOD-GIVEN
RIGHT TO HAVE SEX WITH HER?
My response was:
da26i2l34ksar6klmtcds9gs07b2p42a0j@pulpitfire.org
Yes, according to 1 Cor. 7:1-9, but that doesn't mean I endorse
forcing it against her will. If she didn't render it, she'd be the
one sinning (defrauding), not me, but I would not force it either.
Owd's libel since that time has been:
12im695aitop3f@corp.supernews.com
In reply to my question, "If your wife wishes to abstain from sex for a
period of prayer and fasting, and you do not give your consent; do you
have the God-given right to have sex with her?"
Randy replied: "Yes...."
Since both Randy and Dave have made statements which they cannot now
refute claiming they have the God-given right to exercise force, that
there is no rape in marriage, they excuse, endorse, advocate and promote
spousal rape.
In every libelous post, Owd tries to separate the part of my response
where I said "but that doesn't mean I endorse forcing it against her
will", from the word "Yes", then claims we endorse what we just said
we do not. It's obvious.
Owd is arguing from the premise that if your spouse has a right to due
benevolence, that means they must and will force that right against
your wishes (as if "due" benevolence, of necessity, means "forced"
benevolence), then claims we endorse forced sex on that basis.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Giant Waffle" |
|
| Title: Re: Glenn Contradicts Himself About Rape Accusation! |
10 Oct 2006 12:40:48 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:18:27 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian
Mystic\)" <christianmystic@ev1.net> you spake thusly:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12ih676s04ks1a7@corp.supernews.com...
Giant Waffle wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 18:35:28 -0700, oldwetdog
<g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> you decided to say:
<snip>
Let it be noted right here, that Glenn claims that he did NOT
clip my words, yet, that's exactly what he did do!
My statement went as follows...
GW: "However, if she said no and then I took her by force,
then we both have sinned. Her for saying no and me
for assaulting my wife."
Exactly, thanks, Dave ;-)
I LIKE your statement, Dave, I wouldn't do anything to remove any of it.
Dave, you admit that "assaulting" your wife is wrong, or that it is "sin".
Fine,
But you claim the "RIGHT" to do so,
Where, and when did he do this ?
No one said anything of the sort. I think you know this
and I think that is why you are asking him, so thank you.
__
Giant Waffle
If you wish to be rude, or to play games, go find a mirror
and see if the person you see there would appreciate it.
And if the person you find in that mirror wouldn't, then
you know why I have ended my conversation with you.
Rather, I have chosen to ignore and forget you, at least
until you learn some common decency and respect.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn \Christian Mystic" |
|
| Title: Re: Glenn Contradicts Himself About Rape Accusation! |
15 Oct 2006 11:47:52 AM |
|
|
As I would not want to be falsely accused, I must defend someone being
falsely accused, what can I say ?
"Giant Waffle" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:tnmni2l8o2n6s9cs25vhj9q7faiinkm437@4ax.com...
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:18:27 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian
Mystic\)" <christianmystic@ev1.net> you spake thusly:
"oldwetdog" <g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12ih676s04ks1a7@corp.supernews.com...
Giant Waffle wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 18:35:28 -0700, oldwetdog
<g.aedhealic@yahoo.com> you decided to say:
<snip>
Let it be noted right here, that Glenn claims that he did NOT
clip my words, yet, that's exactly what he did do!
My statement went as follows...
GW: "However, if she said no and then I took her by force,
then we both have sinned. Her for saying no and me
for assaulting my wife."
Exactly, thanks, Dave ;-)
I LIKE your statement, Dave, I wouldn't do anything to remove any of it.
Dave, you admit that "assaulting" your wife is wrong, or that it is
"sin".
Fine,
But you claim the "RIGHT" to do so,
Where, and when did he do this ?
No one said anything of the sort. I think you know this
and I think that is why you are asking him, so thank you.
__
Giant Waffle
If you wish to be rude, or to play games, go find a mirror
and see if the person you see there would appreciate it.
And if the person you find in that mirror wouldn't, then
you know why I have ended my conversation with you.
Rather, I have chosen to ignore and forget you, at least
until you learn some common decency and respect.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
