Does Atheism Lead to Immoral Behavior?

[muhammad_isa]

The problem is that in e.g. Denmark we recognize more than actual bodily harm as criminal. In short we now have psychological violence.

Care to expand on that?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Care to expand on that?

Yes, lets say I over the a period of time degraded another person in language and made threats, then that is now illegal in Denmark and that includes in a marriage. So in every day words if I in effect bullied my wife to have sex with me, it would be rape and psychological violence.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Yes, lets say I over the a period of time degraded another person in language and made threats, then that is now illegal in Denmark and that includes in a marriage. So in every day words if I in effect bullied my wife to have sex with me, it would be rape and psychological violence.

In my opinion, that opens up a "can of worms"..
Why would a man want to marry a woman, who might turn round and accuse him of rape and psychological violence?

It appears to me as "satan rules, OK"
That is one way of controlling the population.

 

[Polymath257]

That is a contradiction..
She either loves her husband, or she does not.
Why would a woman want to prosecute her husband for "rape", and send him to his death?

She may love her husband and still not want to have sex at times. At those times, he should not force her to have sex. If he does force her against her will, then he raped her. It really is that simple.

Why would the husband want to force his wife to have sex when she doesn't want to? To do that shows he doesn't really love her.

You have said that consent doesn't enter into it. And that is *precisely* the problem. It *should* enter into it. Yes, even in a marriage.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

In my opinion, that opens up a "can of worms"..
Why would a man want to marry a woman, who might turn round and accuse him of rape and psychological violence?

It appears to me as "satan rules, OK"
That is one way of controlling the population.

Yeah, but you see. That is your opinion and it counts as you get a vote. But so do I and everybody else.

 

[Polymath257]

Sorry, but this is going nowhere..
A man loves his wife, and the wife loves the man.
..all well and good so far..

And if they both want to have sex, there is no issue. But if one of them does *at that time* and the other does not *at that time*, then sex should not occur. if it does, a rape occurred.

The woman feels violated because her husband couldn't control himself.
Now this is where we part company.
You say that the woman should have the right to have him put to death [ punished for rape ].
..and I say no .. steady on .. if she feels like that, they should part company.

If he loves his wife, he won't use her as a toy to play with that has no feelings. He would agree NOT to have sex that once.

To force her against her will shows he doesn't love her and that he is a rapist.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Yeah, but you see. That is your opinion and it counts as you get a vote. But so do I and everybody else.

Sure..

 

[Polymath257]

In my opinion, that opens up a "can of worms"..
Why would a man want to marry a woman, who might turn round and accuse him of rape and psychological violence?

She would only accuse him if he did those things.

It appears to me as "satan rules, OK"
That is one way of controlling the population.

I think of this as a perfect example of how religion justifies evil behavior (rape of a wife).

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sure..

And in my opinion you are one of Satan's own. That is such a fun game. You can play it and so can I, but I am special so I win and you loose.

 

[muhammad_isa]

To force her against her will shows he doesn't love her and that he is a rapist.

Total nonsense.
You live in a society where it's "OK" to have sexual intercourse with anybody at any time, as long as
you can prove that they consented.
Your judgment is highly flawed, imo.

 

[Polymath257]

Well, this is where we understand differently.
In a traditional Muslim/Christian society, it is a contract that one enters into,
that gives both partners consent to sexual intercourse with each other.

Sex outside of marriage is illegal.

Then that is an evil system. It fails to understand that people have 'off' days, that they get tired, that they can be sick, etc. Giving permission once does not give permission at all times, even in a marriage.

He is guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, if they are divorced.

And if he has sex with her even when she does not want it *that time*, isn't that wrong?

 

[Polymath257]

Total nonsense.

No, this is simply basic respect between people.

You live in a society where it's "OK" to have sexual intercourse with anybody at any time, as long as
you can prove that they consented.
Your judgment is highly flawed, imo.

And I would say that yours is a perfect example of how religion can distort moral judgements. The system you describe is evil.

 

[muhammad_isa]

She would only accuse him if he did those things.

Err, no.
It is quite obvious to us all, that when a marriage breaks down, there is a lot of emotion flying around.
People accuse each other of all sorts.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Total nonsense.
You live in a society where it's "OK" to have sexual intercourse with anybody at any time, as long as
you can prove that they consented.
Your judgment is highly flawed, imo.

Yeah, but you have to decide if you want to live in effect a democracy or not. You don't seem to accept democracy and human rights, so why do you stay?

 

[Polymath257]

Why are they not divorced?
I said "If the wife no longer wants her husband to have consent, she needs to part company."

Do you understand that a person can love another and not have sex some days?

It is also illegal to have intercourse with a woman who has FILED for divorce.
i.e. the husband has been issued with a divorce request.

Again, she may not want to file for divorce *if he would leave her alone*. She may want to have sex *another time*. The issue is that he goes against her will *at the time* and forces he to have sex when she does not want to. And that is rape.

 

[Polymath257]

Err, no.
It is quite obvious to us all, that when a marriage breaks down, there is a lot of emotion flying around.
People accuse each other of all sorts.

This isn't a question of a marriage breaking down. It is a question of one person in a marriage forcing the other to have sex when they don't want to.

If he forces her when she does not feel like having sex *that day*, then he raped her.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Who's "we"?

Okay, now you're just being obtuse. It's a very simple question.

You are just playing games ..

No, I am not. I am asking you basic questions.

I have already told you what I think.

Not quite. You have said it is bad, but you haven't said whether or not something should be done about it.

If a woman is unhappy with her husband, she should seek mediation with her family,
and possible divorce.

But what should happen if a woman is forced to have sex against her will by her husband? Is that literally the only recourse? No arrest? No imprisonment? No protection?

If her husband has caused her actual bodily harm, she might want to seek prosecution by criminal law.

Does forcing someone against their will to have sex with you count as actual bodily harm, to you?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, it does work. Following the Bible’s guidelines on sex, has been beneficial to my group for over 100 years.

I certainly hope that you don't follow the Bible’s guidelines on sex. That would be monstrous.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Following the Bible’s guidelines on sex, has been beneficial to my group for over 100 years.

Is that an argument for following those guidelines? Following my own guidelines on sex was beneficial to me.

For the most part, we have strong families, with well-grounded & happy spouses, children, and parents.

So do we, but without the children. There are other ways to live life that can lead to happiness. I can attest to that from personal experience. My wife and I broke all the rules we wanted to break, and have had a good life.

Promiscuous behavior does not lead to wise, ie., well-thought-out, read mature, results. It’s core is selfishness.

How is promiscuity selfishness? Is trying as many restaurants as one can selfish, too?

I think I’ve posted enough peer-reviewed articles that explicate the dangers & results.

You're posting to people who have already lived a lifetime their own way and without regret. What are you going to teach them about the dangers of sex?

So… you’re saying it’s not generally instinctive for a female to want to be a Mother?

What he is saying is that some women don't want to be a mother now and some don't want to be a mother ever.

If this were so, then there’d be no need for families

I don't see how you arrived at that conclusion from my comment. Maybe you could connect them for me. I wrote, "I disagree. It was to generate children and to guarantee paternity. It was to make families large, not strong. Most of that behavior, whether compelled or forbidden, is of little to no benefit to anybody in the family. This is why women encouraged to get married as soon as they were fertile and forbidden to deny their husbands sex even if that's not what they wanted - to make families larger, not stronger. How does forbidding masturbation or the rhythm method make families stronger? It doesn't. It makes them larger."

Why do you say that if this were true, there's be no need for families. Who's going to raise all of these children?

Your comment on what you’ve inferred as our “reptilian and pre-primate mammalian past”,,, oh my goodness! We are so different in that regard, you & I.

I wish you had commented on why you disagree if you do. Did I post something you consider false? If you think so, why?

How you think our cells, with all of their exquisite & functional protein-building machinery working together, could have arisen without any intelligent guidance, is beyond me.

You believe a god exists that wasn't intelligently designed. Which do you consider more complex, a living cell, or a deity? Why wouldone need a designer but not both?

A man loves his wife, and the wife loves the man...all well and good so far.. The woman feels violated because her husband couldn't control himself.

Love ended there when he forced his wife, if ever existed in the first place.

You say that the woman should have the right to have him put to death [ punished for rape ].

That's your culture. Mine says he should be prosecuted and if convicted, incarcerated.

I say no .. steady on .. if she feels like that, they should part company.

They will, psychologically on that day, legally when she divorces him, physically when she moves out and he goes to prison.

I already explained to you that in a traditional society, marriage is implicit consent.

If you mean implicit consent to force sex, you merely claimed it.

You just can't understand any other point of view than your own.

Here's this again - rejection framed as lack of understanding. Your position is clear and easily understood. It's being rejected as brutal. What your culture considers acceptable, mine considers a crime. What's the hard part to understand there?

Nobody is saying that it is OK for a man to mistreat his wife.

You are, but you don't call rape mistreatment unless a shoulder is dislocated or there are teeth on the pillow.

I do not refer to modern, western marriage contracts, obviously. They are relatively meaningless.

Because they don't authorize husbands to rape with impunity? My marriage is meaningful to me despite not having (or wanting) that right, but then, I'm a humanist. My values are different from yours.

 

[F1fan]

Actually, it does work. Following the Bible’s guidelines on sex, has been beneficial to my group for over 100 years.
For the most part, we have strong families, with well-grounded & happy spouses, children, and parents.

There was a study about marriages and i was surprized to learn that arranged marriages have fewer divorces that two people meeting and deciding to marry.

So you could only behave this way because you are following rules in the Bible? Or are there other factors that your group has that leads to a different attitude from the norm? What is your group?

Notice how many Christians don't stay married, so saying the Bible has guidelines is really up to the individual. Following rules doesn't lead to happiness, it is people developing maturity and sound attitudes.

(Notice my qualifier.{“For the most part”} When it doesn’t, it’s due to an encroaching affinity for the world & its influences, something Christians are counseled to avoid. [1 John 2:15] But we strive to listen to our Creator, and the majority of us [JW’s] are successful.)

I’ve got an honest question for you:

For the last 150 years or so, the Bible’s influence has been increasingly waning, especially with regard to sexual restraint & limiting venereal contact.

Do you think people are exhibiting more emotional stability in this world, or less?

I don't think religion makes people good or bad. There have always been good and bad people and some are products of theior environment. I suspect poverty creates circumstances where there is more crime and instability, and to my mind this is hapvening all over the world because there are more wealthy people attaining more wealthy, and the rest are left fighting for table scraps. Life in the first world is getting more exvensive, and without more resources to the individual then financial stability wanes. The Bible warns of greed, yet more conservative Christians allow greed to proliferate in the USA. More tax cuts to the wealthy, no healthcare to the poor, and cuts to social services. What do you predict will happen?

I see less. And much of this instability we see, is due to the fractured family life they experienced growing up.

Well a society that isn't fair will lead to that. Why not let liberals help create a system where there is more access to opportunity for the poor and middle class? No one can eat a Bible when they are starving.

Promiscuous behavior does not lead to wise, ie., well-thought-out, read mature, results.

It’s core is selfishness.

So even if a promiscuous person were honest & thought he was mature, he would still be dealing with another person, that might be dishonest, hiding their disease status.

I think I’ve posted enough peer-reviewed articles that explicate the dangers & results.

Have at it.
(But it won’t be with me or mine, lol!)

Same old nonsense. Mature adults can have sex and limit the risks of disease. The implication that sex corresponds to some sort of immaturity is not supported by evidence. It's an obsolete fear.