Comments on: Dawkins on rape http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/ Ceci n'est pas un blog Mon, 02 Jan 2012 21:09:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anthony http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13358 Anthony Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:25:19 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13358 Now that you and I agree that the Bible says that rape is morally wrong, the question is now: what should be the consequences for the rapist? In that society, it seems that no woman would want to remain unmarried, and it seems that if an unmarried woman was not a virgin, she was unlikely to find a husband. So for the virgin who is raped, she could either (1) remain unmarried for the rest of her life, or (2) be married to the rapist. Now, neither sounds particularly desirable (and, fortunately, there are other options in our society), but I would say (2) is better than (1). But you think (1) is preferable? You make a value judgement that rape is wrong, which you base on another value judgement that anything that damages the well-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular is wrong (with the implicit assumption that the wells-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular will always coincide, which is absurd). But where did <i>this</i> value judgement come from? Is it as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six? Now that you and I agree that the Bible says that rape is morally wrong, the question is now: what should be the consequences for the rapist? In that society, it seems that no woman would want to remain unmarried, and it seems that if an unmarried woman was not a virgin, she was unlikely to find a husband. So for the virgin who is raped, she could either (1) remain unmarried for the rest of her life, or (2) be married to the rapist. Now, neither sounds particularly desirable (and, fortunately, there are other options in our society), but I would say (2) is better than (1). But you think (1) is preferable?

You make a value judgement that rape is wrong, which you base on another value judgement that anything that damages the well-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular is wrong (with the implicit assumption that the wells-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular will always coincide, which is absurd). But where did this value judgement come from? Is it as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six?

]]> By: Steven Csrr http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13356 Steven Csrr Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:14:26 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13356 The laws of society must protect those who are most vulnerable. So it is morally right for the rapist to be forced to marry the girl he raped? We can evaluate rape to see if it contributes to the well-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular. And we can see that it doesn't. You can say that this is 'arbitrary'. We might have evolved so that rape benefitted people, just as pigs might have evolved to have wings. But pigs don't fly, and rape harms. Thank goodness we have moved away from the absolute moral values of the Bible and no longer force rapists to marry their victims. The laws of society must protect those who are most vulnerable.

So it is morally right for the rapist to be forced to marry the girl he raped?

We can evaluate rape to see if it contributes to the well-being of humanity in general and individuals in particular.

And we can see that it doesn't.

You can say that this is 'arbitrary'. We might have evolved so that rape benefitted people, just as pigs might have evolved to have wings.

But pigs don't fly, and rape harms.

Thank goodness we have moved away from the absolute moral values of the Bible and no longer force rapists to marry their victims.

]]> By: Anthony http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13351 Anthony Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:48:01 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13351 Steven Carr - or Csrr - what an honour! Proof indeed - if rape were morally right, then the man would have been allowed to walk away without facing the consequences. This is just one example of the consistent teaching of the Bible - and Deuteronomy in particular - that the laws of society must protect those who are most vulnerable, reflecting the character of the God of the Bible. Anyway, back to the topic of the post ... would you agree with Dawkins? I take it you believe rape is wrong? Would you say that "your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six"? Steven Carr - or Csrr - what an honour!

Proof indeed - if rape were morally right, then the man would have been allowed to walk away without facing the consequences. This is just one example of the consistent teaching of the Bible - and Deuteronomy in particular - that the laws of society must protect those who are most vulnerable, reflecting the character of the God of the Bible.

Anyway, back to the topic of the post ... would you agree with Dawkins? I take it you believe rape is wrong? Would you say that "your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six"?

]]> By: Steven Csrr http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13350 Steven Csrr Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:22:44 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13350 Deuteronomy 22 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Biblical proof that rape is an absolute moral wrong... Provided , of course, that it is a virgin that is raped. Deuteronomy 22 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

Biblical proof that rape is an absolute moral wrong...

Provided , of course, that it is a virgin that is raped.

]]> By: Anthony http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13272 Anthony Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:26:54 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13272 Hi Dale, Welcome! And thanks for the comment. I think Dawkins is being consistent - atheism implies there are no moral absolutes - but it's quite striking, and sickening, when that position is pushed to its logical conclusions... See <a href="http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=pjYqrLI3hh8" rel="nofollow">William Lane Craig on objective moral values</a>. Hi Dale,

Welcome! And thanks for the comment. I think Dawkins is being consistent - atheism implies there are no moral absolutes - but it's quite striking, and sickening, when that position is pushed to its logical conclusions...

See William Lane Craig on objective moral values.

]]> By: Dale http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/2008/11/06/dawkins-on-rape/comment-page-1/#comment-13253 Dale Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:38:48 +0000 http://www.anthonysmith.me.uk/?p=259#comment-13253 Hey Anthony, Dale here (one of the astro Msc students at Sussex, i think we met before) Hope you don't mind me commenting on your blog, found it randomly.. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at here. So Dawkins thinks morality is arbitrary, this is consistent with his views. Do you present this for any particular reason as an argument against atheism or just to make RD look callous? it's good to read something intelligent on a blog for once :) cheers, Dale Hey Anthony,

Dale here (one of the astro Msc students at Sussex, i think we met before) Hope you don't mind me commenting on your blog, found it randomly..

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at here. So Dawkins thinks morality is arbitrary, this is consistent with his views. Do you present this for any particular reason as an argument against atheism or just to make RD look callous?

it's good to read something intelligent on a blog for once :)

cheers, Dale

]]>