Trump sez: Transgenders B gone!
- Thread starter ok doser
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
Ah, the victim card ....like the poor stripper who ends up raped at a frat party.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Have you been drinking? :freak:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Apparently glory thinks that adultery is a victimless crime :dizzy:
glorydaz
Well-known member
Your answers are not well thought out. Is it vigilante justice you seek?
The "victim" should be careful or he will be charged with driving his wife into the arms of another.
You'd have to rename a lot of things, as well as fix a law where a woman would have to submit to an invasive test on the demand of a disgruntled husband. (If they were dumb enough to have unprotected sex.)
glorydaz
Well-known member
Stop whining boys. The so called "victim" in these cases is seldom, if ever, innocent.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Oh, suddenly you forget? :chuckle:
You pushed this same line before, and when I agreed with you, you didn't accuse me of drinking.
Yep, a person reaps what they sow. Whether it is a husband who has failed in his role as a husband, and gets left in the lurch, or a girl who decides she can strip and ends up getting raped.
Consequences. Crying victim is the new normal.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Because righteousness does not come from the law. You can't make more laws and stop crime or sin. Just like more gun laws won't mean less killing. Adultery laws won't mean less adultery.
You only change one crime for another...usually more deadly. First kill the husband so he can't bring charges against you....or vice versa, as the case may be. Leave no witnesses is the code of anyone faced with serious charges. Makes perfect sense to me.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
My question is; "Who's going to pay for all this stuff, and the people's salaries who now have to sift through it all?"
What kind of kit would be used on an adulterous man?
Right-e-o!
Hebrews 7:19
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
See Duke lacrosse players
Victims are usually considered innocent against the accused for a reason, until they are shown to be guilty as well.
Stripping would be illegal.
A stripper is not to blame for being raped. The blame for rape falls on the rapist.
The stripper would be punished as well, for fornication and/or adultery, and the punishment would depend on which.
The only reason I can think of that would make you say that is that you're not paying attention to what I'm saying.
What kind of a question is that?
You claim there is no victim in adultery. Now you're saying there is?
Who is the victim of adultery, GD?
Another question for you as a follow up:
Do you know what the Bible says about the rape victim's innocence?
Criminals lose many of their rights when they commit a crime. The victim has a right to a fair and speedy trial.
This is special pleading.
If the husband has evidence that his wife is cheating on him, or perhaps he caught her in the act, and brought her before a judge, the judge could rightly demand that the woman be tested, and such evidence, if there were bodily fluids not her own in her body, would be the second witness. after the eyewitness of her husband catching her in the act.
You mean: if they were dumb enough to commit adultery...
So blame the victim, is that it?
That's wicked, GD, you should know better.
People have a right to fail. People do not, however, have the right to commit a crime.
If a husband has failed in his role as a husband, that doesn't excuse his wife from cheating on him.
Stripping would not be legal in the first place.
This is putting the blame on the victim.
Again, GD, I ask, what does the Bible says about the rape victim's innocence?
Again, people have a right to fail. People do not have the right to commit a crime based on other people's failures.
Which is why the Bible says that a woman, if she is being assaulted, should cry out, struggle, do everything she can to get away from her attacker.
Today, liberals teach "just allow it to happen and go to court later."
So what?
We're talking about justice. Not righteousness.
Similar topics, yes, but different in their scope.
I completely agree.
But we're not (or at least, I'm not) talking about stopping crime.
We're talking about deterrence of crime, making so that people don't WANT to commit crimes.
"Do not murder. If you murder, you will be executed after conviction on the testimony of two or three witnesses in a trial."
"Do not commit adultery. If you commit adultery, you will be executed after conviction on the testimony of two or three witnesses in a trial."
That's all you need. No regulating how one goes about having relationships, no regulations on how you can purchase guns.
Just a law that says do not murder.
Just a law that says do not commit adultery.
And the punishment for both will deter people from committing the crime. Not the law itself, but the punishment for breaking the law.
So therefore..?
If a child hits his sister, and then you punish the child, but later he pulls her hair after hitting her, do punish him for only pulling her hair, or do you punish him for both pulling hair and hitting his sister?
You don't stop enforcing justice just because the criminals try to get back at society.
The Bible teaches that punishments should be appropriate to the crime committed.
Then on top of adultery, the spouse would be guilty of murder.
He or she would still be executed.
Criminals are generally poor problem solvers.
Committing a crime makes sense?
:shocked:
Considering that the government would be limited to two roles, criminal justice and infrastructure, the government would pay for it with money from the 5% personal increase tax.
The police would be charged with enforcing the law, investigations, etc. The judge (of which there would be over 15 million (based on 120M households), using the system provided in Exodus 18. Judges would not be paid.
Why would a kit be used on a man? The woman is the one you test...
And if the husband is committing adultery with another man, then the punishment is still death, based on two or three witnesses.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Once again george, you ignore the deterrent effect of a properly enforced law against adultery
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Spoken like a true supporter of the "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's unlimited supply of tax money" plan.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
i don't have any idea what that means :idunno:
[MENTION=14087]George Affleck[/MENTION] - do you believe that laws against rape deter incidences of rape?
iow, if we removed all laws against rape, would you expect to see incidences of rape increase, decrease or remain the same?
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
[MENTION=13955]glorydaz[/MENTION] - do you believe that laws against rape deter incidences of rape?
iow, if we removed all laws against rape, would you expect to see incidences of rape increase, decrease or remain the same?
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
a forensic dna testing kit, which could provide evidence of the woman's dna in the man's pubic area and would also be needed to characterize the man's dna
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
what an absolutely bizarre thing to say