I don't believe you

[Mr Walker]

8 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

As both of us have plenty of kid stories to support this. You bet they have a sense of justice. 

A 3 year old's sense of justice is like our own. It is what it was taught to see as just.

Teach it to put itself first, and justice will demand this,  Teach it to put others first, and that will be justice. Teach it to share equally, and that will be the criteria for justice  

[Mr Walker]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I can't discuss the subject with you. I really don't think your brain can comprehend the issue of evil. 

I don't know your actions, and I don't care to hear about them, your words are enough. If you can mitigate rape through time then your not capable of understanding right from wrong there. 

Eating meat won't be seen as an evil. Keeping pets won't be seen as evil. These are your vegetarian fantasies and your egotistical approach regarding your own proclamations. Your analogies are dismissed due to their ridiculous nature. It's why you can't deal with the here and now very well. You need to refer to barbaric practises in the past, or make up any version of the future you like based on your arguments. 

Evil acts are evil acts. Always have been, always will be. 

You can not know that eating meat will not be seen as evil

You are trapped inside your cultural perspective just like most people  from any time period.

Many humans already believe that it is And that is the point. Evil is what we perceive it to be

200 years ago i doubt you  would have perceived or understood it as wrong to expect your wife to have sex with you when you felt like it  However if you were a considerate man you might have excused her when she was unwell or had another  reason for saying no.

But the social principle and expectation in marriage was that neither partner could or should refuse sex just because the y didn't feel like it   That is  not a reflection on you, just on the way it was.

Where would you have got a different  value or principle from ?    Why and how could you  possibly have learned to be difernt to everyone around you and in your society  There were no books or speakers espousing the concpet. There was no social media presenting alternate views.

Today, even though many ARE arguing the immorality of eating meat, you stick to your preformed beliefs and values that it is not wrong  That is how you were raised, how your society thinks,  and why or how could you come to believe differently? . 

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

i was physically disciplined as a child, and teenager, by parents and schools, and  never  once thought it wrong, (or got angry or resented it )  although i did find it unjust to be caned for not kicking a football far enough.

Hi Walker

Some of us got beat at home because dad was a drunk, and at one school I got strapped nearly daily for three years because my dad didn't have a high social standing like the rich south end candy asses who were never held accountable for their actions that I thought was kind of unjust and resented. But hey that was the and the way society was so no foul no harm right just like slavery was.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

Habit doesn’t share the same position on rape as Walker does, to be fair to him.

My apologies to him, I thought he had the same mindset. In the other thread he did support barbaric practises as a 'sign of the times' who h I thought as bad as this argument. 

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

You are right one doesn’t need to be taught that rape is an evil act. 

If a husband really does respect and care for his wife, then he must know that forcing himself upon her us wrong. We don't need culture or laws to know that. 

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

I  am stunned that Walker is arguing the merits of the rapist., not!

I know right. 

Its disturbing that people even think like that. 

[+Sherapy]

16 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

My apologies to him, I thought he had the same mindset. In the other thread he did support barbaric practises as a 'sign of the times' who h I thought as bad as this argument. 

If a husband really does respect and care for his wife, then he must know that forcing himself upon her us wrong. We don't need culture or laws to know that. 

I know right. 

Its disturbing that people even think like that. 

Habit wouldn’t commit that Ted Bundy was evil. 

Indeed, a man that loves his wife isn’t gonna have a hard time distinguishing the difference between love and violence. 

[psyche101]

40 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually you do Otherwise you are judging from outside of an entire historical and cultural perspective end saying that your culture is superior

Actually no I don't.

I am saying that I am judging.

Theocratical pardoning of murder is a disgrace, no matter what the culture is. Killing people, and especially because and imaginary being condones it, should really a a global crime. If you think the culture pardons murder, you are the one with the real problem here. 

Not killing people is always better than killing people. 

Quote

You don't think hour killings occur in the west we had one in Adelaide not so long ago.

No you didn't. 

He was murdered by the brides family. It would be classes as an honor killing if his own family murdered him. 

And that not justifiable either. I have no problem with judging that incident either. Barbarism. 

Quote

we all have flaws and faults but tend not to see our own.

I've got plenty, but I don't even think about killing others. 

Quote

Many western  men kill their wives when their wives say the y are leaving them or have had an affair and  that is a form of honour killing.  

No its murder. That's why people go to jail for that sort of thing. 

Quote

I would ask a woman if she feels subjugation is better or worse than sexual objectification and i would ask women from different cultures and beliefs  

I don't care what you would do. 

Sudjugation is removal of rights, objectification is the result of a testosterone fueled idiot. 

Quote

Some women might not see or feel they are being subjugated, but rather cared for, loved, protected, and not having to face the dangers and hardships of a western woman.   The word and terrn is very value laden.  If the woman is doing what she  wants and values, and feels safe and happy, what is the problem ?

That's not value, that's brainwashed. 

Quote

My wife has been abused by "liberated" women because she chose to stop working when we got married and allowed me to care for her and provide all her needs. Her  pov was that she did not need to work and so her job could go to a young unmarried woman, but the liberationist tried to tell her that work was where women became radicalised  and socialised, and that she  needed to work to establish her independence and dignity  I refrained form commenting and let my wife rip them apart.

she explained tha t she was freer (and happier( not working for money but doing what she loved) , than she had ever been in the 20 years she had worked, and tha t as we were equal partners half of everything i earned was hers  anyway.    

They sound more like you. No wonder you let them tear your wife apart. I wouldn't have if it was my partner. All you did was stand by them in silence from my perspective. Enforcing cultural values over basic rights. 

[psyche101]

39 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

A 3 year old's sense of justice is like our own. It is what it was taught to see as just.

Teach it to put itself first, and justice will demand this,  Teach it to put others first, and that will be justice. Teach it to share equally, and that will be the criteria for justice  

The article shows they have inherent values. They must be removed to do wrong. That's brainwashing again. 

[+Sherapy]

25 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You can not know that eating meat will not be seen as evil

You are trapped inside your cultural perspective just like most people  from any time period.

Many humans already believe that it is And that is the point. Evil is what we perceive it to be

200 years ago i doubt you  would have perceived or understood it as wrong to expect your wife to have sex with you when you felt like it  However if you were a considerate man you might have excused her when she was unwell or had another  reason for saying no.

But the social principle and expectation in marriage was that neither partner could or should refuse sex just because the y didn't feel like it   That is  not a reflection on you, just on the way it was.

Where would you have got a different  value or principle from ?    Why and how could you  possibly have learned to be difernt to everyone around you and in your society  There were no books or speakers espousing the concpet. There was no social media presenting alternate views.

Today, even though many ARE arguing the immorality of eating meat, you stick to your preformed beliefs and values that it is not wrong  That is how you were raised, how your society thinks,  and why or how could you come to believe differently? . 

My mother beat us and starved us, when she was passed out drunk she would put the couch in  front of the front door to prevent me from getting out and going to the neighbors for food. So, I climbed out the front window. I was 5 years old. Me and my sister were hungry. Hunger is a powerful impetus to survive. 

It was instinct.

We were so hungry once we are toothpaste puked and never ate toothpaste again. Again common sense. 

We are wired to survive and have enough sense to figure things out. 

 

[+Sherapy]

18 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Actually no I don't.

I am saying that I am judging.

Theocratical pardoning of murder is a disgrace, no matter what the culture is. Killing people, and especially because and imaginary being condones it, should really a a global crime. If you think the culture pardons murder, you are the one with the real problem here. 

Not killing people is always better than killing people. 

No you didn't. 

He was murdered by the brides family. It would be classes as an honor killing if his own family murdered him. 

And that not justifiable either. I have no problem with judging that incident either. Barbarism. 

I've got plenty, but I don't even think about killing others. 

No its murder. That's why people go to jail for that sort of thing. 

I don't care what you would do. 

Sudjugation is removal of rights, objectification is the result of a testosterone fueled idiot. 

That's not value, that's brainwashed. 

They sound more like you. No wonder you let them tear your wife apart. I wouldn't have if it was my partner. All you did was stand by them in silence from my perspective. Enforcing cultural values over basic rights. 

I have to say a lot men wouldn’t just stand by and let a women be brow beat. I see this quality on UM too. I think it is instinctual in men to defend women, unless something goes terribly wrong somewhere.  

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Sherapy

[psyche101]

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You can not know that eating meat will not be seen as evil

I sure can. I have a working brain. That's a that's really required in this instance 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You are trapped inside your cultural perspective just like most people  from any time period.

I'm not at all. I have the benefit of 7 billion other examples and a long historical record to consult. I can easily see people who have created subcultures to feed greed. 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Many humans already believe that it is And that is the point. Evil is what we perceive it to be

Many people are quite stupid. Not much I can do about that. 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

200 years ago i doubt you  would have perceived or understood it as wrong to expect your wife to have sex with you when you felt like it  However if you were a considerate man you might have excused her when she was unwell or had another  reason for saying no.

Marriage should be that consideration. It strikes me that some see a partner as an object. That's where it falls apart. Having deep affection for another means you won't want to hurt them. So. Men who raoed their wives because the law allowed it acted in a very evil way with no thought for anyone but themselves. 

Anyone who has been married for genuine reasons should know this very well. If one was to rape another, clearly that person has no respect for the victim. That's not marriage, its more akin to slavery. 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

But the social principle and expectation in marriage was that neither partner could or should refuse sex just because the y didn't feel like it   That is  not a reflection on you, just on the way it was.

It's not the way it was. It was the exception to the rule that evil people lived by. 

The easiest measure is to remind one if they would treat their sister or mother that way. Suddenly such barbaric values take pause. Most people have a conscience whether they like it or not. 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Where would you have got a different  value or principle from ?

Upbringing, cultural values supposedly imparted from religion, family respect and self respect. 

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

 Why and how could you  possibly have learned to be difernt to everyone around you and in your society  There were no books or speakers espousing the concpet. There was no social media presenting alternate views.

There are family values, self respect and affection. How long has Christianity been around? Doesn't Jesus allegedly preach love? 

They ate excuses to hide behind, not values. I really can't see every man raping his wife before 1972.

32 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Today, even though many ARE arguing the immorality of eating meat, you stick to your preformed beliefs and values that it is not wrong  That is how you were raised, how your society thinks,  and why or how could you come to believe differently? . 

Their arguments fail, and badly. 

Mainly we are omnivorous animals. We are designed to eat meat. People have died and killed babies from ignorant attempts at going vegan. People who look down on others for food choices don't have a good enough argument to support their false superior position. My sisters are vegan. They don't see me as evil. They explain their choice and lead by example. Any who go beyond that are not reasonable. 

A PETA representative also stated that drinking milk is a white supremist statement. There's a thread on it right here. These people will be laughed at in the future as they are now. If synthetic meats become commercially viable and it saves suffering and helps the planet, then traditionalists might be seen as bad some day, but your extreme example is ridiculous. 

[psyche101]

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

I have to say a lot men wouldn’t just stand by and let a women be brow beat. I see this quality on UM too. I think it is instinctual in men to defend women, unless something goes terribly wrong somewhere.  

Exactly. 

Well said. Traditionally males pride themselves as protectors. Legalised rape is just a coward hiding behind laws made by those with the same lack of ethics and morals. 

[+Sherapy]

5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Exactly. 

Well said. Traditionally males pride themselves as protectors. Legalised rape is just a coward hiding behind laws made by those with the same lack of ethics and morals. 

Indeed, typically a mother protects her babies, the human male protects the female. 

In real time, we think of a guy who doesn’t  stand up for his wife as odd. It just seems off. 

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Sherapy

[psyche101]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Indeed, like a mother protects her babies, the human male protects the female. 

In real time, we think of a guy who doesn’t  stand up for his wife as odd. It just seems off. 

 

Very much. 

But that seems to be the case here, as he said himself, he left his wife to be torn up by the mob. 

A pattern might be emerging here. 

[+Sherapy]

9 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Very much. 

But that seems to be the case here, as he said himself, he left his wife to be torn up by the mob. 

A pattern might be emerging here. 

 

How dare anyone give her crap about wanting to stay home, damn right Walker should  have said so right with her. 

She sounds like a very considerate human to give up her job for another person, In the tiny little town they hail from, its noble. 

Walker is damn lucky to have her on many levels, geez she had her hands full with him. IMO that is. 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Sherapy

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Very much. 

But that seems to be the case here, as he said himself, he left his wife to be torn up by the mob. 

A pattern might be emerging here. 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

Habit doesn’t share the same position on rape as Walker does, to be fair to him.

You are right one doesn’t need to be taught that rape is an evil act. 

I  am stunned that Walker is arguing the merits of the rapist., not!

 

Again, through ignorance or deliberate purpose you miss my point, and argue the opposite to it. 

Today  rape  is wrong.  200 years ago it was not wrong in marriage, but was wrong outside of it 

Further back in the past  rape was not wrong at all, except in a few special instances  Go back far enough and humans had sex like  other primates  with men being stronger and testosterone driven and thus having sex with any female who was available and not protected by another male    There are many things  like this. Human were doing all  sorts of things which we find find unbelieveable today

Wrong is a subjective, ethical judgement, you are making, based on modern values  and principles

Today  I  would execute or castrate any rapist  from a western society,  in part because, indeed, i am old fashioned, but i will not blame  men or women from the past, who did not have our advantages  or share  our values and principles, for how they behaved  You might as well blame Attila the Hun or Genghis khan for being uncivilised.   

your error is common among absolutists in moral philosophy who believe a philosophical position  can be constructed and held, absolutely, without regard to all or any  other factors.

In real life, it just is not, and can not, be so.   

[Farmer77]

3 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Further back in the past  rape was not wrong at all, except in a few special instances 

So what makes it wrong today then? Just that laws prohibit it?

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

Some of us got beat at home because dad was a drunk, and at one school I got strapped nearly daily for three years because my dad didn't have a high social standing like the rich south end candy asses who were never held accountable for their actions that I thought was kind of unjust and resented. But hey that was the and the way society was so no foul no harm right just like slavery was.

jmccr8

Not sure what you are saying here My parents and my teachers were morally and ethically correct to punish me for wrong behaviours, even though the  teachers sometimes made mistakes.

Y your father was very difernt to mine and thus you formed a difernt opinion on the whole issue. i was treated with fairness and justice. it sounds like you were not  

So you are problaly right to feel it was unjust and resent it. i just loved my parents   more for instilling discipline, understanding of consequence,  a sense of justice consequences and fairness, and other good habits in me and loving me enough to punish me for wrong doing, even when it hurt them to have to do so.  

In my case no harm no foul, and i would have suffered more  if i was NOT disciplined and taught consequences and to obey rules.  

Ive had a good to brilliant life, largely because of who i am and how i behave, and that is all down to good parenting 

[+Sherapy]

16 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Again, through ignorance or deliberate purpose you miss my point, and argue the opposite to it. 

Today  rape  is wrong.  200 years ago it was not wrong in marriage, but was wrong outside of it 

Further back in the past  rape was not wrong at all, except in a few special instances  Go back far enough and humans had sex like  other primates  with men being stronger and testosterone driven and thus having sex with any female who was available and not protected by another male    There are many things  like this. Human were doing all  sorts of things which we find find unbelieveable today

Wrong is a subjective, ethical judgement, you are making, based on modern values  and principles

Today  I  would execute or castrate any rapist  from a western society,  in part because, indeed, i am old fashioned, but i will not blame  men or women from the past, who did not have our advantages  or share  our values and principles, for how they behaved  You might as well blame Attila the Hun or Genghis khan for being uncivilised.   

your error is common among absolutists in moral philosophy who believe a philosophical position  can be constructed and held, absolutely, without regard to all or any  other factors.

In real life, it just is not, and can not, be so.   

 

Mr. Walker, 

“Between 1859 and 1880 -256 cases were brought before Grand juries in Kent, England  28% for Rape and 57% for indecent assault, 15% no indictment at all.” 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3828543?read-now=1&seq=4#metadata_info_tab_contents

Rape is wrong.

Edited April 24, 2019 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker]

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

So what makes it wrong today then? Just that laws prohibit it?

No it has nothing to do with laws Laws reflect what we believe to be right and wrong

Our sense of right and wrong evolves as societies change and our own living conditions change  

Once upon a time (unless from a very wealthy family)  a woman had no choice but to be an economic dependent of  a man. There was no paid work for women and they were needed to have and to raise children  As the economy changed beginning in the age of factories, and then significantly in the 20th century  women were needed in the work force and gained an economic value.

 This translated into a social and political value because the y began to have their own wealth and property (despite many laws still limiting this as late as the second half of the 20th century)  and slowly into equality 

On e of the reasons my wife and i provide seed funding to women in places like India for their own businesses is that economic independence  is the essential first step in all other forms of independence  and eventually equality A man is a lot less likely to abuse or rape his wife if she has the economic abilty to simply walk away from  him and survive  on her own resources.  

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

Our sense of right and wrong evolves as societies change and our own living conditions change  

So if a catastrophe happened that changed our living conditions  you can envision us returning to a place where rape was acceptable?

[Mr Walker]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

 

Mr. Walker, 

“Between 1859 and 1880 -256 cases were brought before Grand juries in Kent, England  28% for Rape and 57% for indecent assault, 15% no indictment at all.” 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3828543?read-now=1&seq=4#metadata_info_tab_contents

your point? This confirms my post, and does not refute it. 

 As in pointed out, in Victorian England,  rape outside marriage was a crime and, while it was hard to take to court and prove, it was successfully prosecuted.

There was no real attempt to prosecute rape in marriage because  it was not illegal  and the only near successes were where a divorce was pending or a court order was in place 

[Mr Walker]

5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

So if a catastrophe happened that changed our living conditions  you can envision us returning to a place where rape was acceptable?

Absolutely All morality is relative and contextual

Slavery, cannibalism,  polygamy, marriage at puberty ,involuntary euthanasia . All could be brought back if conditions changed catastrophically, or even slowly  but significantly

That would be inevitable just as after the fall of Rome or Greece  the world reverted to dark ages. 

Of course, one of my favourite movies is "The Postman" with Kevin Costner, based on the brilliant book by David Brin  

I cheer  for the postman who brings the USA back from the brink  of such a catastrophe, by pretending to be a postman and thus restarting the us postal service, which gives people hope and unites them against tyranny. 

Not shown in the movie, but in the book, is a scene where slave women taken as wives or concubines by a military  dictatorship,  agree to kill all the men in power on one evening   They are betrayed by one woman who falls in love with her captor. 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Mr Walker

[eight bits]

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

We learn what is right and wrong from  the structure and behaviour of our society and the people in it. 

We are the people in it.

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

The idea that you can rebel, and be an individual, and get away without consequence,

One of those things is not like the others.

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Only a person who lives under shariah law can judge it.

Watch me.

Or did you just type the sentence backwards? Only a person who can't judge shariah law lives under it.

[+Sherapy]

2 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

your point? This confirms my post, and does not refute it. 

 As in pointed out, in Victorian England,  rape outside marriage was a crime and, while it was hard to take to court and prove, it was successfully prosecuted.

There was no real attempt to prosecute rape in marriage because  it was not illegal  and the only near successes were where a divorce was pending or a court order was in place 

“Today  rape  is wrong.  200 years ago it was not wrong in marriage, but was wrong outside of it.”

How was rape wrong outside of marriage, but not wrong in the marriage?