So, I was browsing Deuteronomy last night — the part just beyond the Ten Commandments. Apparently if a woman is raped in the city but doesn’t call for help, she and her rapist both have to be killed. Now, if she is raped in the country, she doesn’t have to die, because we can assume she called for help but no one heard her. In that situation, I believe The Word of God demands that her father be paid some money and she is to be married to her rapist forever. Also, interestingly, a man whose testicles are crushed can’t be a member of the Assembly of the Lord, whatever that means.
Now, my question is this. Should we have these holy laws printed up and posted at every court house and school like some we should do with the Ten Commandments?
Deuteronomy actually has an interesting history. I believe there is historical support for the proposition that a Jewish priest forged it as a “lost” book of Moses which was found in a timely manner that ended up giving a lot of power to the priests of the time.
…”she and her rapist both have to be killed.”
Does that mean God is pro-choice?
Presumably, they would be killed *after* the birth of the baby.
Yeah, Deuteronomy is not exactly on my top reading list in the Bible. It is probably the book with the greatest inconsistencies and outdated moral/sanitary codes.
And the same ones who want to “kill” the homosexual b/c of Deuteronomy would never call for the stoning of a rape victim; and certainly not for the rapist. She should live with the consequences of dressing like a slut-and who could blame him for giving into her womanly form?
Of course you recognize the absurdity of some of these propositions. But there are fundamentalists don’t see these as being beyond the pale.
I’ll take the bait.
I assume some here feel that God is a myth. Based on that, you would feel that we are evolved animals.
For animals, there is nothing more natural than rape (or murder, for that matter). The idea that rape is a bad thing is something that is part of our social rules that were evolved.
Regardless if you feel that Deuteronomy is the work of some power-hungry priests or God, I think you could agree that the idea of what is in that book was to place some rules around rape defining it as bad. Punishments are included with it.
Do the ideas shown in Deuteronomy match 2008 ideas? No way. However, it seems clear to me that they were a way place some rules on “bronze-age farmers” that they could obey, and cause their families to thrive. This is a start in how our laws were formed, although they don’t work well today.
Regardless of their source, I think the laws in there are very useful for historical purposes, as they try to put some order where there was none. The show a compromise where neither side is really happy, but it is workable.
So, to answer Doug’s question, I think they should be placed in historical areas.
However, as someone who does not want to see other religion’s stuff in new public buildings, I don’t think we need to add more.
This doesn’t mean we should take down parts of the 10 commandments that have been there for 100 years, maybe just in the past 10-15 years when people started to make a battle out of it.
I’d probably be comfortable leaving up Ten Commandments posted prior to the publicity stunt on behalf of the Ten Commandments movie wherein ten commandments displays were set up by the Fraternal Order of Eagles to promote the movie. That would mean prior to 1956.
Well Jason I dont believe God is a myth – but I do believe we are evolved animals. Those points are not mutually exclusive.
And Id say that rape and murder are NOT natural orders of animals. There is no basis for such a claim. The only animals to consistently demonstrate pre-meditated murder against members of the same species are higher-order primates (humans and chimps). This may due to increased cerebral function.
Other animals kill for food or for protection – and it is often relegated to other species, not their own. Often this is instinctual and cant be associated with malice. I think we often define murder as an unnecessary act of aggression tied to mental recognition of ones actions. Otherwise its insanity or manslaughter.
Further I think rape here is misdefined. Many animals engage in sexual acts with varied partners – often in a forced way to maximize propagation of ones own “seed” or genes.
Rape is not simply the act of unwilling or un-intended sexual intercourse. It is a premeditated act of aggression and demonstration of power to subjugate another person. To express ones own superiority over another – not only physically, but emotionally and mentally. To diminish the worth of the victim through forced sexual act.
Theres no precedent for such in nature among other animal phyla as far as we know.
I feel that we are evolved animals. I also feel that water freezes at zero degrees celcius.
It’s too bad we don’t have more diverse religious populations in these 10 Commandment “battle zonesâ€. Just once I would like to see a Muslim exercise his/her religious freedom and erect some versus of the Quran right next to the 10 Commandments display. Unless our 10 Commandment warriors want to contend the freedom of religion only extends to certain factions of Christianity.
By the way, I’m Catholic. I went to Catholic school. My entire family is Irish-Catholic and has worked for the church in various capacities for a few generations.
BrianW,
Yes, I meant killing I suppose rather than murder. Some people that murder do it to survive, though, like animals. Animals have murdered the same species over a mate, that does not seem much different than murdering over a lover as is done by humans.
As for rape, I have seen male dogs do that to each other. I’m pretty sure that is a show of dominance, just as rape often is for humans. However, some rape for humans is for sexual urge, as your example for animals.
Yes, we should “know better” in both cases, and part of the way we know better is our laws.
Chris,
I agree with exactly what you are saying, and that is why I don’t want religious displays in new construction.