this post was submitted on
715 points (59% like it)
2,249 up votes 1,534 down votes

atheism

subscribe1,131,435 readers

4,757 users here now


Help Atheist Organizations!

The Secular Student Alliance, Camp Quest, and Foundation Beyond Belief were all nominated for the Chase Community Giving program, which awards grants based on the votes of the public. Everyone gets 2 votes on Facebook, plus an additional one if they share a CCG page. The links for them are:

SSA | CQ | FBB

Voting runs from September 6-19


Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.

New posts: New Rising
Self posts: New Relevant
Non-image posts: New Relevant

Recommended reading and viewing

Thank you notes


Related Subreddits <--the big list

GodlessWomen YoungAtheists AtheistParents
BlackAtheism AtheistGems DebateAnAtheist
skeptic agnostic freethought
antitheism humanism Hitchens
a6theism10 tfbd AdviceAtheists

Events
10/5-6 NAPCON2012 - Boston
08/11 Regional Conference - St. Paul MN
Giving
DWB/MSF fundraiser
Kiva lending team
FBB's Appeal to Freethinkers to Fight Cancer
Camp Quest
Ex* Groups
ex-Muslim ex-Catholic ex-Mormon
ex-JW ex-Jew ex-SistersinZion
ex-Bahai ex-Christian ex-Adventist
Assistance
Coming Out
Atheist Havens
Start an Atheist Club at Your School

Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net

Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv

Read The FAQ


Submit Rage Comic

Submit Facebook Chat

Submit Meme

Submit Something Else

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 158 comments

[–]Zosimaa 25 points26 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Isn't it "You can't covet your neighbor's property?"

A wife or daughter was property back then.

[–]MeloJelo 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"Covet" means that you should not desire to have their property (human or otherwise) as your own (which would mean marrying a woman), and should just be happy with what you have. If you rape that property though, you're not really stealing her, just vandalizing, I guess . . . ?

[–]ihatecinnamon 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So a man can ONLY rape his OWN children? What a turn off...

On the other hand, that explain why they insist you call them "father".

[–]probablynotthere 52 points53 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

In the Bible, there are harsher penalties for grabbing someone's dick than there are for rape.

30 pieces of silver is what god values women at... if you're a virgin, of course.

[–]dabodabodabadee 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How much is that converted to dollars?

[–]probablynotthere 31 points32 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The shekel varied from 9 to 17 grams of silver ($11 to $20 worth in today's prices). Also, it was 50 pieces, not 30.

So $550 to $1000 is what a woman was worth. As a comparison, around the time of the Civil War, a slave would be around $3500, nearly $50,000 today.

So god valued women less than racist US Americans valued blacks.

[–]Rinsaikeru 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well that's not accounting for inflation necessarily--how much bread/goats or whatever could you buy with that much silver?

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Let's take all of the inflation out of it and convert our shekels directly into loaves of bread, a trade unit that makes as much sense today as it did then.

According to this, a half-shekel was worth 160 grains, or kernels, of barley in biblical times. This means a full shekel would be worth around 320 kernels. So 50 shekels would net you 16000 kernels; a stunning stockpile of seeds.

A thousand barley kernels seemingly ranges between around 38 and 50 grams. So your 16000 kernels would be, at most, 800 grams of barley, taking up an area of about 70 cm2.

Because barley is/was commonly made into bread, I'm going to convert our barley into flour. Assuming our extraction is perfect, and all parts of the grain are usable (not likely), we will have 800 grams of flour. According to this, 136 grams of flour is roughly equal to 1 cup of flour, a unit commonly used to bake. So our 800 grams gets us almost 6 cups of flour. We'll say 6 to be generous.

This recipe, makes one “small loaf” and calls for 2 cups of barley flour. There are, of course, a few other ingredients we're missing, but I'm not going to guess at how expensive/hard to get they would be. This means our 6 cups of barley flour makes us 3 “small loaves”. It's hard to say how many people this bread would serve. The picture of the recipe is cut into 8 slices, and I have to assume each is of a modest size. The thickness, pre-cooking, is said to be 1 cm, and it is said that it will rise slightly. If we estimate it is now 1 ½ to 2 cm thick (can't tell), then the bread looks to be a circle of about 16 cm to 22 cm across, 1 ½ to 2 cm thick. This doesn't seem like very much bread, but I cannot tell how dense it is.

For comparison, this suggests that the average US small pizza is 10 inches, or 25.4 cm across. This suggests that a small pizza, of that diameter, will feed 1 – 2 people. Our bread is slightly more than half the width, but has none of the filling toppings, so lets assume our bread is a full meal for 1 or 2 modern people. This means all of our bread fills (very generously) 3 to 6 people, as we have 3 of these loves.

So in biblical times, it seems like you could rape the daughter, buy Mom, Pops and Junior some supper, and everyone, including baby Jesus, would be cool with that shit. Plus, you'd get a wife who had to be dutiful to you according to that same bible! Hurrah for everyone (except your new wife)!

TL;DR: Rape the daughter, buy the family dinner.

[–]HFGoliath 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]RiOrius 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

According to the reasoning over here, it's worth far more than that. For one, apparently elsewhere in the bible people buy slaves for 30 shekels. Also, someone claims that one shekel is worth four Roman denarii, each of which is worth about the equivalent of $20 (according to Wikipedia), making 30 shekels $2400.

But yeah, also 30 shekels is what Judas was paid for betraying Jesus. So presumably it's not peanuts.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I always thought that the Judas story suggested that Judas was really greedy, and loved money, so he sold Jesus for an offensively low sum (which matches with the anti-greed themes of the bible). I thought the paltriness of the sum was supposed to emphasize the depth of the betrayal leading to the subsequent damnation. But you might be right, I haven't been in a church in a while.

[–]ILike4ChanShh 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What?

[–]Riobe 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]Nougat -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm gonna go those bitches some math. Bitches love math.

[–]Grimjestor 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, but you have to remember that statistically half of the black slaves were male, and thus intrinsically more valuable.

/yesiamabadperson

[–]probablynotthere 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, it depends on whether or not the slave owner was planning on raping his slaves. There still is a billion dollar industry focusing on people, mostly female, being sold for rape, either by the owner or by others for the owner's profit.

[–]TheAughtSpectrum 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, but...god turned into human form and died so we can ignore all the bad things he did to us early on! So it's ok! Right, guys? Guys?

[–]Chunkeeboi -4 points-3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Atheist raised and schooled as a Catholic here. Pretty sure that rape would come under what has been translated as "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

[–]grubas 37 points38 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Deuteronomy 22:28-29, if you rape a virgin you have to pay her father 50 shekels(seen above to be a startling 550-1000 dollars), put on a ring on it, and it's all kosher. Cause it's not adultery if she's not married or bethrothed.

[–]Monteze 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So, if you raped it then you gotta put a ring on it?

[–]Grimjestor 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Nah, just be wealthy enough to have it hushed up by paying off the family. Nothing new here.

[–]Enex 30 points31 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's not what adultery means.

[–]probablynotthere 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

In Catholic interpretation, yes. But not in Old Testament thinking.

[–]Chunkeeboi 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well the Old Testament is made up of many books and they tend to vary quite a bit in what they claim old Yahweh said and thought about stuff. Most of it is just justification for the same old primtive patriarchal, tribal bullshit that can be found from one end of Christendom to the other end of Islam to this very day.

[–]bosh-head 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh, so you see a moral equivalence between consensual per-marital sex and rape. Way to go! You really saved yourself from making us think the Bible doesn't take the crime of rape seriously!

[–]Chunkeeboi -1 points0 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Erm, what part of "I'm an atheist" don't you get? I'm trying to explain something to you in context, not trying to convert you to Christianity. I don't see any moral equivalence of the kind. But don't let that get in the way of your little rant.

[–]bosh-head 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Hmm. Apologies for the "rant", but I stand by my point that saying 'rape' falls under 'adultery' would make per-marital sex the moral equivalent of rape. So it's not much of a defense. The Bible is held up as a timeless moral standard, and yet the vast majority of people, including Christians, wouldn't per-marital sex as anything at all like rape.

[–]fistoroboto 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Uh, no. Not even remotely, if it was just adultery there wouldn't be any provisions for whether the woman cried out or not.

Please read Deuteronomy, Chapter 22, verses 22-29. Also keep in mind that being raised as a Catholic doesn't matter too much, as a major cause for the reformation was the tendency of the Catholic Church to value tradition over scripture.

[–]lingben 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Doesn't at least one of the parties have to be married for it to be considered "adultery"? That's the definition that I understand but maybe you can show that it was not understood this way back then?

EDIT: Seems you are correct. Found this:

"...whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:12

[–]Chunkeeboi 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Again, the Bible wasn't written in English and the commandments are broad concepts. You can imagine that 175 commendments probably wouldn't have fitted on two stone tablets small enough for old Moses to carry down the mountain after he... er God had finished chiseling them out.

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I feel like God could have maybe doubled up the "name in vain" and the "one God" things, and maybe just through in a passage about rape. Or, or . . . he could have gone all the way to 11!

[–]deusnefum 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I was raised and schooled Catholic and taught the same thing, but it's just the church trying to adjust bronze-age lunacy to modern values so it's not as offense to sensible people.

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Adultery is sex outside of your marriage. If neither the rapist nor victim are married, it is not adultery, merely fornication in the eyes of the Just and Holy Lord.

[–]captainhaddock 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Old Testament "adultery" was basically an affair with a married woman. Even prostitutes didn't count.

[–]Killroyomega -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you aren't a virgin...

Why are we discussing meatsacks?

[–]MeloJelo 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I take it you were joking and implying that women who were no longer virgins and were viewed as little more than bodies to Biblical society.

[–]throwaway4643 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How much for one that's already broken in?

[–]xiipaoc 29 points30 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Let's not forget that there aren't only ten commandments in the Bible. The Decalogue is just a quick summary that God himself told Moses with thunder and lightning and whatnot in Exodus 19-20. God says a whole bunch of other shit in the Bible -- Jews count 613 commandments, for example (365 negative ones and 248 positive ones, so you know the count was fudged somewhere).

By the way, there was the concept of a redeemer, a goel, who would vindicate you if you were wronged. This was usually a next of kin. Famously in the Bible, Dinah is raped in Genesis 34 (a good story, by the way), and Judah and Simeon go apeshit and kill everyone after making them circumcise themselves so that they're too much in pain to resist. So rape isn't exactly condoned in the Bible. The word used for "rape" is "time", from a root meaning "impure"; the action of Shechem is translated as "lay with her by force", but I don't understand the Hebrew "vayishkav otah vay'aneha"; the first two words are "lay with her" and I think the third word has the root "ani", meaning "afflicted". Anyway, yeah, rape is not condoned in the Bible.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I would just like to point out here -- if you have enough control over people to force themselves to cut their own dick skin off, they probably aren't going to resist you while you are stabbing them.

[–]sulumits-retsambew 0 points1 point ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

In this context vay'aneha means subjugated/humiliated

source

Edit, it could also mean "made her scream" - not necessarily in a negative way.

[–]Aemina 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Why do people post image macros instead of videos?

[–]erisdiscordia 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

While I can't speak for others, I'll note that I personally will read an image macro, but won't watch a video. Macros get my eyeballs and videos just get skipped. (Either I don't have my headphones on and don't want to fish for them, or something compelling has my ears; random Reddit links usually can't compete.)

[–]leorolim 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Because my boss blocked youtube, that's why!

[–]sugaraped 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm either browsing reddit at work (no sound) or on my phone (no flash / video). But image macros always work for me.

[–]Aemina 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm an unemployed student with no smartphone who works when he goes to class and has a full stereo system on his home computer.

Different worlds.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

-"What are your specialities?

-"Rape, murder, arson, and rape"

-"You said rape twice"

-"I like rape!"

[–]Trobs 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Holy fuck, this made the front page again?

[–]SchrodingerE 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

NO adultery or coveting neigbor's wife?

[–]ihatecinnamon 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

-Can I rape my wife, then?

-If I'm single (no adultery) and the girl is single (not a neighbor's wife), can I rape her?

[–]SchrodingerE 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

first of all why are you into rapping anyone? second, I'm not actually a Christian or anything, not even religious in any way... but I must say that the main premise of "rape" related crimes is addressed in the 10 commandments. Obviously there were volumes written after that initial teaser trailer expanding on what you can and cannot do. I don't agree with most of it... but you gotta agree that 'God' did address the main problem in the 'important rules' section.

[–]trulyinteresting 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Just a reminder - The actual ten commandments - note youtube vid

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Nice video. The first 2 minutes or so are wadsworth, but I learned something after that.

[–]trulyinteresting 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

wtf is wadsworth?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That meme was born here on reddit: http://i.imgur.com/yxfpC.png http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-wadsworth-constant

It's now implemented across YouTube. Add &wadsworth=1 to any YouTube URL to jump 30% into the content.

[–]trulyinteresting 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

cool. Thank you. I was hoping it wasn't going to be an updog sort of thing.

[–]Liese_lotte 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, I never got why it's a problem to say God's name "in vain". Does he have a beeper that sounds every time anyone says "God", so maybe you should just say it when it's important, since he may be in the middle of something? WTF?

[–]Godssheep 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yes he has a beeper, and it's fooled by the use of hyphen!

"God" : Damnation.

"G-d" : Clever loophole, that can even fool the creator of the universe.

[–]Liese_lotte 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You, Godssheep, made me smile. Not to mention you also solved the mystery of God G-d's beeper. Thanks!

[–]zippydoodle -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is sorta like that... In ancient times, people believed if you knew the name of a god, you could control that god. So the idea of not saying God's name in vain is a prohibition against using God's name to try and make God give you what you want. Basically, it's a commandment against praying for selfish things (like winning the lottery, getting the job you just interviewed for, or passing a mid term you didn't study for).

[–]throwaway4643 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Isn't it more against people excusing their own behaviour or getting other people to do what they want by falsely claiming that 'god said so'?

[–]wogmafia 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

that is exactly what it means, people always misinterpret the third commandment. It is against the religion to claim you know the will of god and all those religious nutjobs are breaking this commandment every day.

But as always there is an out, just claim you had a revelation and were spoken to via jesus/angel or whatever and then people can no longer tell if you are a prophet or a mentally ill person walking down the street yelling the end is near.

[–]Liese_lotte 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

OK, I get it, but what bothers me is the fact that it is up there on the same level as "Thou shall not kill" and that seems a bit over the top, doesn't it?

[–]Lawtonfogle 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

To understand the Hebrew view on rape, you have to understand it was pretty much assumed you were going to be married, young. Virgins in the bible refers to preteens and below, and even the word translated as 'rape' in the NIV in Deuteronomy 22:28-29, is not the same word as used earlier in the chapter where rape of a man's wife was punished by death. It is better to see this as consensual or coerced sex with a virgin, which as I said, means a preteen or younger.

So the standard idea of rape was punished by death and was part of the ten commandments of not being jealous of another man's wife (they didn't understand back then that rape if often about power, not sex). So to be honest, the Bible wasn't really all that accepting of rape... unless it was statutory rape, in which case you had to marry the child. Which is pretty much like how some laws are even today in the US (to be exact statutory rape is illegal regardless if one marries the victim, but it far less likely to be prosecuted if they marry and have lighter sentences).

[–]throwaway4643 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

TIL in some states in the US you can legally be married at 14, have sex and drive a car at 16, join the army at 17, but you'll have to wait to 21 to drink.

[–]Lawtonfogle 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Where I live, if the girl is pregnant, she can marry at any age. Considering the younger girl known to be pregnant was 4...

And people here think Muslims are evil for allowing 12 year olds to marry. At least they have had a chance to learn to READ AND WRITE FIRST.

[–]alien_signals 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

i'm gonna ask for evidence for this 4yr old pregnancy. because my bullshit detector is on fire, seeing as the necessary structures to produce pregnancy do not develop until around 8-12 at the earliest.

[–]razorbackgeek 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Rape is such a harsh word. I prefer surprise sex.

[–]beatlebabe11 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

My religious and political beliefs are / is Louie CK.

[–]Grain_of_Salt_ 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually if you raped/seduced a virgin the only penalty is that you had to marry her. At least this was the practice in some sects.

[–]bernadette_agnes 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is so flawed. Thou shall not commit adultery. Rape is a form of adultery. Sex with anyone other than your spouse is adultery.

[–]TheKyleBaxter 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So it's OK to rape your spouse?

[–]bernadette_agnes 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No, it's not. But in the context of this particular joke, he is really reaching.

[–]TheKyleBaxter 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I 100% agree. That's an awful big reach, but even still, there's an obvious hole in his logic.

[–]offensive_litter 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is so flawed. Rape is not a form of adultery. Rape is a terrible thing and shame on you for defining it as anything other than forced, nonconsensual sex.

[–]bernadette_agnes 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I am speaking strictly in the context of a joke that refers to the Ten Commandments. He is suggesting that the Ten Commandments do not cover rape. He is suggesting that rape is considered ok under the Ten Commandments. Shame on you for putting words in my mouth.

[–]offensive_litter 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The Ten Commandments do NOT cover rape, it is NOT adultery. I can not believe you have the ability to throw the shame back on me.

I am defending victims of rape. You are defending a fantasy book which you pick and choose what is real and what is make believe. And here we see why it is so dangerous to blindly follow... makes you make comments like adultery is rape.

I did not put words in your mouth. You said them and I corrected you. And I will again and again and again until we get it right. Love and peace my friend.

[–]bernadette_agnes 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is not any of your business which books I do or do not follow, blindly or not. You should be ashamed of yourself. Do some research. If you are going to rail against believers, one of which I may or may not be, you should understand what they think. For thousands of years the Ten Commandments have been studied from a theological perspective. I have a degree in theology, which STILL does not mean I am necessarily religious. I was making a statement from the perspective of someone who has studied the way the the Church breaks down the meaning of each commandment. From a theological (not emotional, as in wah wah rape victims wah wah) perspective, rape is a form of adultery. Two unmarried people who have sex are adulterers. Two people who have sex when one is married and one is not are adulterers. Two people who have sex who are married but not to each other are adulterers. A rapist is an adulterer. A rape victim has been forced against their will to be an adulterer. Are they implicitly forgiven and not at fault? Yes. Again, I am simply making a statement regarding a theological perspective on how the church views the commandment Thou shall not commit adultery. So, yes, still shame on you for coming at this discussion with a purely emotional point of view. You will never get anywhere in discussions with believers or non believers if you can't speak about these things while disregarding pure gut reaction emotions.

[–]alien_signals 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

you both really want each other to be ashamed. and maybe you both should be.

[–]aheroafaked 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually this is somewhat false.

Though usually understood to prohibit the unauthorized taking of private property, this commandment is sometimes interpreted to apply more narrowly to the “stealing” of a person (kidnapping) or “stealing” of sex (rape).

[–]PlusSixtoReason 13 points14 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sorry, I don't subscribe to any make up interpretations of the bible just so that it can align with secular moral advancements.

[–]tnova 15 points16 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's kind of a stretch if you ask me.

[–]kbilly 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh. So it's ok to steal then. Because that's not what it was talking about in the first place.

Got it.

[–]Godssheep 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What a great guy that God!

Talk about rape? Don't mention rape!

Talk about astronomy? Call the Earth 'oval'

Talk about human rights? For all except slaves and woman.

What a great source of knowledge!

[–]PeteOK -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It seems to me that rape would also fall under the category of adultery.

[–]chuckknucka 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Rapists need not be married.

[–]protocos -4 points-3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I heard this somewhere. Simply put, the idea is stealing is the all encompassing crime. You nab a wallet, you steal someone's right to spend the money they earned. You kill a father, you are stealing the child's right to a dad and a mother's right to a husband. You rape a woman, you steal her right to her own body. So not only could this be covered by 7 & possibly 10, but 8 as well.

[–]sesse 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

In that case, please stop stealing children's right to a secular education in public schools.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

anyone got the clip for the lazy?

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]WholeFoodIsCorporate 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh great. Now there's thought crime and the condemnation of natural human desire all in one passage. How Orwellian of him.

[–]Christoll 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Adultery. This is comedy people. Laugh but dont bother discussing its deepest meanings.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Psh I already knew that. Moment I realized there was no god I was rapin' everyone in sight!

[–]MonkeyFightingSnake 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You don't have to come and confess, we lookin' for you!

[–]mcoree 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

For the record,i think it might (?) Fall under "thou shall not commit adultery", but I honestly don't know

[–]Cubbance 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Man, I love Louis CK so much.

[–]thoumyvision 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Actually, rape is covered under adultery, which is in the 10 Commandments. Adultery in this case is meant as any sexual act outside the context of a loving relationship between a man and his wife.

[–]Dysalot 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's a funny comment, but I can't bring myself to up-vote a title stating "rape is okay!"

[–]TheKyleBaxter 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Does anyone have a link to this actual video?

[–]atreyucof 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

repost.

[–]mechadamuramu 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is why /r/atheism is growing so fast.

[–]UNSUB_FROM_PICS -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Hm. I'd actually assume that rape would be filed under the seventh commandment, Thou shalt not commit adultery, under most circumstances.

[–]mtman900 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Under Jesus's broad description, yes.

Thankfully, you can still rape your wife and not run afoul of any of the original 10. Just make sure you don't say the big guy's name while you're doing it.

[–]fuckclub[S] 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Adultery (Noun):
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not his or her spouse.

[–]UNSUB_FROM_PICS -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I kind of doubt that a provision outlawing voluntary extramarital sex implicitly allows involuntary extramarital sex.

[–]Fellows23 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Guess again.

[–]Godssheep 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Scumbag God : Knows everything, but only say things open to interpretation.

[–]Shampyon -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If we assume this is true, it still doesn't cover marital rape.

[–]throwaway4643 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Back in the days of the bible, marriage equaled irrevocable consent to sex (and abuse). It still does in parts of the world.

Marital rape was a contradictio in terminis.

[–]probablynotthere 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Under some circumstances.

If you recall, another area of the Bible recommends the punishment for raping a virgin was paying her father money and marrying her without option of divorce. Also, it would be fine to rape your spouse.

In reality, it's only protecting man's property rights.

[–]kbilly 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So basically, the god mirrors the men at the time. Carl Sagan, you are a genius.

LOL

[–]probablynotthere 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yep. God was made in man's image- a homophobic, petty, sexist, and violent ethnic supremacist.

[–]Tw9caboose -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

GOD I fucking love Louis C K

[–]nopantstoday -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well done sarcasm

[–]WayneQuasar -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm willing to take downvotes for this, but for some reason, at first glance, I thought this was George Carlin. Maybe because of the Atheist nature of the joke...either way, Louis CK and Carlin are my top 2 comedians, so I s'pose it all works out.

[–]dr0pi -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Maybe forcefully having sex with a women didn't come across his mind when he thought them up. The commandments were created to cause people to not be obnoxious jerks, roll with that.

[–]blaise8012 -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

WTF? i'm new on reddit and i'm getting shit on for how i write fucking comments. my type is too bold?....eat my shit! what am i missing here?

[–]temujin1234 -4 points-3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I think that commandment is against perjury, not swearing.

[–]ITSxDARE -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So much sound logic on r/atheism. Cause every christian believes everything in the bible is what we should do.

[–]Nard_Dawg 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How is it not sound logic to expect that when somebody believes a book is the word of God and His eternal truth that they would follow it completely?

[–]americanhorror 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

how do christians pick and choose what to take and what not to take from their holy text?

[–]ITSxDARE 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

cause it's not necessarily a belief in everything considering different chapters are written differently, but rather faith that's more important.

[–]mambypambyland 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I knew Christians were pretty ignorant, but now they're even ignorant to their own Bible? That's pretty bad.

[–]Godssheep 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, let's insult /r/atheism because they don't know that most Christians don't follow shit in the Bible.

Oh wait... we know already : It's a useless book.