No Death Penalty. What Is Your Position?

[JudgeRightly]

Going to respond to this for now...

Do you think that marriages fall under the responsibility of the government?

Great question..my answer is no.

Let me clarify, as it depends on what you call the government.

Why not?

To reiterate: Why should marriage not fall under the government's jurisdiction?

I see no reason for marriage not to be a private affair.

You realize that you just made an argument from incredulity, right?

It wasn't till the late 1800's that the state got into the business of marriage.

So, if not the government, then whom?

Marriage is a contract

Correct. Had you stopped there, you would have been fine.

Marriage is indeed a contract.

So, that raises a couple of questions:

Who has the right to enforce such a contract?

Should the married couple be treated differently than two unmarried persons who have no relation to each other?

In other words, should the world treat them differently?

between two people

It's certainly easy to think that.

But that's wrong.

It's not just between two people.

It's a contract between the couple, God, any children of the spouses, their family, their friends, their neighbors, and the whole world.

and nobody enters into such with the understanding that they or their spouse are in danger of being put to death if things don't work out and one of them has a fling.

The divorce rate in 2018 was about 40% for first marriages, and that jumps to about 60% for remarriages.

What would that percentage be, I wonder, if the couples knew (no, the one's who are deterred from marrying because of the following don't count) that if they cheated on their spouse and were caught and brought to trial, that they would be executed for committing adultery?

Sure, the overall marriage rate would drop for a bit, but that would (within a few years) lead to marriages being stronger and lasting longer, because couples would want to make sure that the person they are with is someone whom they can live with for the rest of their life.

In addition to that, any resulting children would have a much stronger foundation on which to grow, which would have a tremendous beneficial effect on their lives later on.

Under such circumstances, the answer is to either work through the difficulties or go your own way. I personally believe the second choice is superior.

Given only those two options, how often do you think that couples would choose the former?

Because I guarantee you that it wouldn't be 50/50 split between either option.

 

[Rusha]

Well, I was more saying it was understandable that someone could seek relations elsewhere if they were trapped in a relationship with someone who was cold and unproviding rather than remain with a person who was cheating on them but it's not clear cut one way or another to me. Not all cases of adultery involve some person wilfully cheating on their partner without giving a damn. They sure don't deserve to be bludgeoned to death over it regardless.

:think: Okay, no bludgeoning. We agreed on that prior to you mentioning it. :chuckle:

However, no one accidentally cheats. ..

 

[Arthur Brain]

I cannot for the life of me understand why so many people have an incurable itch to control other people’s lives.

No Stripe, I am not saying you have this itch. But there are many who do.

Neither can I. It's beyond bemusing.

 

[Arthur Brain]

:think: Okay, no bludgeoning. We agreed on that prior to you mentioning it. :chuckle:

However, no one accidentally cheats. ..

Well, true enough on the former.

Okay, nobody accidentally falls into bed with another but did their partner also accidentally choose to be distant and unloving whereby that could happen?

Probably getting off topic now...

 

[ok doser]

I cannot for the life of me understand why so many people have an incurable itch to control other people’s lives.

Trying to place where I've heard this argument made lately :think:

Oh right

Pro-choicers

 

[Rusha]

Given only those two options, how often do you think that couples would choose the former?

Because I guarantee you that it wouldn't be 50/50 split between either option.

It depends on the individuals involved. If one values his/herself and their children, staying tells the children such behavior is acceptable. Insofar as property, it should lean favorably towards the needs of the children and the parent who is not at fault.

 

[ok doser]

ok, so the context is that when Jesus spoke the words "He that is without sin among you", He was addressing the scribes and pharisees, who would not have recognized the concept of original sin and who would have rejected the accusation of any single sin except the one they were committing by violating Leviticus 20:10

So, how many of those 613 laws were you aware of before googling it as you didn't answer on the point previously?

every single one of them, artie, same as anyone who's read the whole Bible

now, why was that question so important that you felt it worth asking twice?

Otherwise, what a way to wrangle a verse that no biblical scholarship on the point endorses that I'm aware of.

appeal to authority :sigh:

 

[ok doser]

Im gone for a few days and finally these two Trump worshippers got nailed.. Good job.

Are they "hurting" you?

In a free society, you don't have to socialize with them.

:think:

 

[JudgeRightly]

It depends on the individuals involved.

How so?

If one values his/herself and their children, staying tells the children such behavior is acceptable.

Not necessarily, and leaving only teaches the children that it's ok to run away from one's problems.

Wouldn't it be better for the couple to stay together, and resolve their differences, changing themselves to for the better, and thereby showing their children that their previous behavior is destructive, but that such behaviour could be changed?

Insofar as property, it should lean favorably towards the needs of the children and the parent who is not at fault.

So, Rusha, I know this is crossing streams, but who is going to enforce the division of property?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Going to respond to this for now...







To reiterate: Why should marriage not fall under the government's jurisdiction?



You realize that you just made an argument from incredulity, right?



So, if not the government, then whom?



Correct. Had you stopped there, you would have been fine.

Marriage is indeed a contract.

So, that raises a couple of questions:

Who has the right to enforce such a contract?

Should the married couple be treated differently than two unmarried persons who have no relation to each other?

In other words, should the world treat them differently?



It's certainly easy to think that.

But that's wrong.

It's not just between two people.

It's a contract between the couple, God, any children of the spouses, their family, their friends, their neighbors, and the whole world.



The divorce rate in 2018 was about 40% for first marriages, and that jumps to about 60% for remarriages.

What would that percentage be, I wonder, if the couples knew (no, the one's who are deterred from marrying because of the following don't count) that if they cheated on their spouse and were caught and brought to trial, that they would be executed for committing adultery?

Sure, the overall marriage rate would drop for a bit, but that would (within a few years) lead to marriages being stronger and lasting longer, because couples would want to make sure that the person they are with is someone whom they can live with for the rest of their life.

In addition to that, any resulting children would have a much stronger foundation on which to grow, which would have a tremendous beneficial effect on their lives later on.



Given only those two options, how often do you think that couples would choose the former?

Because I guarantee you that it wouldn't be 50/50 split between either option.

JR, I'm not going to bother splitting up this post as in essence I don't agree with you and it's not worth the time. A relationship, marriage, shacking up together is between the two people who agree to it and nobody else. Outside of abuse it's nobody else's business whatsoever.

 

[Rusha]

Well, true enough on the former.

Okay, nobody accidentally falls into bed with another but did their partner also accidentally choose to be distant and unloving whereby that could happen?

Probably getting off topic now...

If there is a lack of affection, I would think something else brought it on. Insofar as seeking attention elsewhere, it’s called cheating. Misunderstandings can be worked through. Going out and cheating brings things to a whole new level.

 

[Arthur Brain]

every single one of them, artie, same as anyone who's read the whole Bible

now, why was that question so important that you felt it worth asking twice?



appeal to authority :sigh:

Oh, you think everyone who's read the Bible is aware of all of those 613 laws at the drop of a hat?

Even you should know that that is ridiculous.

 

[ok doser]

I see no reason for marriage not to be a private affair. It wasn't till the late 1800's that the state got into the business of marriage.

does the state have a vested interest in promoting the stability of the family?

I cannot for the life of me understand why so many people have an incurable itch to control other people’s lives.

because most thinking people recognize the correlation between good behaviors and good outcomes

and poor choices and undesirable outcomes

for example:

 

[JudgeRightly]

JR, I'm not going to bother splitting up this post as in essence I don't agree with you and it's not worth the time.

A cop out, but whatever. And I thought we were making some decent progress in this conversation.

A relationship, marriage, shacking up together is between the two people who agree to it and nobody else. Outside of abuse it's nobody else's business whatsoever.

In other words, "I'm right and I don't care what you have to say about it!"

 

[drbrumley]

Trying to place where I've heard this argument made lately :think:

Oh right

Pro-choicers

Not my fault if they misapply it...

 

[ok doser]

we made an unprecedented effort in the mid sixties to alleviate chronic poverty which had the unintended consequence of making fathers obsolete, in encouraging single motherhood

I cannot for the life of me understand why so many people have an incurable itch to control other people’s lives.

was the attempt to end poverty an "incurable itch to control other people’s lives"?

having generated the unintended result of the collapse of the black family structure in america, should we be concerned and attempt to implement measures and policies to address that, or would that also be an "incurable itch to control other people’s lives"?

 

[Arthur Brain]

If there is a lack of affection, I would think something else brought it on. Insofar as seeking attention elsewhere, it’s called cheating. Misunderstandings can be worked through. Going out and cheating brings things to a whole new level.

I get what you're saying but sometimes relationships just break and sometimes they're not repairable and "cheating" is after such has happened. It's not always a clear cut black and white is all I'm saying and I'm not condoning flings etc by saying any of this either.

 

[ok doser]

Not my fault if they misapply it...

it's a poor argument no matter who is using it - akin to the damnable "consenting adults" argument that gave us the collapse of marriage, abortion, pornography, etc - it's rooted in selfishness and disinterest in the suffering of others

 

[ok doser]

Oh, you think everyone who's read the Bible is aware of all of those 613 laws at the drop of a hat?

moving the goalposts :sigh:

Even you should know that that is ridiculous.

and a strawman to finish :sigh:


and you dodged this one: why was that question so important that you felt it worth asking twice?

 

[Rusha]

Wouldn't it be better for the couple to stay together, and resolve their differences, changing themselves to for the better, and thereby showing their children that their previous behavior is destructive, but that such behaviour could be changed?

It depends on the differences. If the couple is having respectful disagreements, certainly. OTOH, physical violence, drug or alcohol abuse or cheating are situations no one should put their children or self through.

So, Rusha, I know this is crossing streams, but who is going to enforce the division of the property?

Hopefully the couple. Otherwise a court appointed mediator and the judge.