header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Well, the NY Times at least thinks that publicly humiliating a public figure ...

 (Read 832 times)

ATexasVol

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 4813
  • Liked:
for consensual adultery is wrong.  

The Adultery Wars

Adultery is a private choice. The important rejection of it comes from love, not intimidation. The reason not to commit it is that it is likely to devastate someone you love if he or she learns about it. And the only way that person won't learn about it is if you tell a lot of lies. Telling a lot of lies eventually harms your ability to maintain a trusting relationship; secretiveness undermines intimacy. And tending a committed, intimate relationship is a deeply meaningful part of life, though we all know it has its share of bad days.

While biographers have described people who are exceptions and seem able to countenance adultery and marital intimacy at the same time, by and large the reason not to choose adultery is that the pleasure it offers is taken in trade for harming more enduring love and more important loved ones.

But publicly humiliating anyone for consensual adultery is draconian, and wrong. It teaches children cynicism. What they see is how little respect there is for privacy, and how gratuitously and harshly adults will harm one another to gain a little power. And using adultery or any aspect of consensual adult sexuality as a weapon in political battles is more abhorrent than the act itself.

You might say that how and why we disapprove of adultery is as important as whether we do.

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18468
  • Liked:
Depends on the party on whether or not it is news to the gray lady 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 3124
  • Liked:
I'm curious if fuzzy agrees with the NY Times on the topic?

"...one more reminder of why it is a bad idea to turn consensual sex between adults into political fodder.

Start down that road, and public figures (and their families) are needlessly humiliated, useful careers are destroyed, and citizens are left feeling cynical...

I suppose we could try going this route again: teaching values to the young by conducting sexual witch hunts. But what will they really learn? That adults are nasty and unforgiving.

That, as Nathaniel Hawthorne demonstrated, it is often too easy to get people enthused about hurting people who behave differently."

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8472
  • Liked:
Humiliating a public figure for consensual adultery is wrong.  

That's true in a sociopolitical vacuum.  Recently, when the shoe was on the other foot, the Republican Party line was that Bill Clinton "lacked the moral authority to lead" for the same offense.  Couple that with the Evangelical Christian support of Trump, and it becomes more about exposing hypocrisy and dolling out humility than it does about merely humiliating Trump.  

Adultery is a private choice.
 
Tell that to God.  

Not that the Ten Commandments couldn't use a good re-write.  This time include something about rape and slavery, and leave out all the egotistical insecurity parts about "worshiping me" etc.  

You might say that how and why we disapprove of adultery is as important as whether we do.

Exactly.  And when it's enveloped with this depth of hypocrisy, it deserves to be exposed, especially when Trump keeps lying about it.  
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 08:21:30 AM by fuzzynavol »

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8472
  • Liked:

Start down that road, and public figures (and their families) are needlessly humiliated, useful careers are destroyed, and citizens are left feeling cynical...

Maybe it'll lead to better people running for office, as those with "skeletons" in their closet will be afraid to run.  

That, as Nathaniel Hawthorne demonstrated, it is often too easy to get people enthused about hurting people who behave differently."

He was talking about Fox News.  

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 3124
  • Liked:
Maybe it'll lead to better people running for office, as those with "skeletons" in their closet will be afraid to run.  

Ah, a sexual purity test.  

Commit adultery at any point during your life and be disqualified from becoming an elected official.

You're such a prude, fuzzy.

So maybe we should extend the requirements to not breaking the other 9 commandments as well.

gymvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6690
  • Liked:

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
If everyone is thinking alike then somebody isn't thinking.

George S. Patton

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18468
  • Liked:


Fuzz has short term memory problems concerning slavery 
The Bible does address the issue of rape. As expected, when the Bible mentions the crime of rape, it is depicted as a gross violation of God’s design for the treatment of the human body (Genesis 34). The Bible condemns rape whenever it is mentioned. For example, there is a particular passage in the laws given to the nation of Israel before entering the Promised Land under Joshua’s leadership. This passage (Deuteronomy 22:13–29) spoke directly against forcing a woman into a sexual encounter against her will, or what we know today as rape. This command was meant to protect women and to protect the nation of Israel from committing sinful actions.

 Deuteronomy 22:25–27 specifies the punishment the Mosaic Law required for a man who raped a betrothed woman. The man was to be killed by stoning while the woman was considered innocent. Though the Mosaic Law was for the nation of Israel during the time of Moses, the principle is clear that rape is sinful in the eyes of God and, under the Law, led to the most extreme punishment possible—death for the rapist.

There are some difficult passages in the Old Testament in relation to this issue. One is Deuteronomy 22:28–29, “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 her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.” If the rape victim was not betrothed, then the rapist faced different consequences.

We must see Deuteronomy 22:28–29 through the lens of ancient culture. In those days, social convention treated women poorly. They couldn’t own property. They couldn't get a job to support themselves. If a woman had no father, husband, or son, she had no legal protection. Her options were slavery or prostitution. If an unmarried woman wasn’t a virgin, it was extremely difficult for her to get married. If she wasn’t marriageable, her father didn’t have much use for her.

God’s punishment on the rapist of a virgin—a monetary fine and lifelong responsibility—was designed to deter rape by holding the rapist responsible for his actions. He ruined her life; it was his responsibility to support her for the rest of her life. This may not sound fair to modern ears, but we don’t live in the same culture they did. In 2 Samuel 13, Prince Amnon raped his half-sister, Tamar. The horror and shame of being violated yet unmarried made Tamar beg him to marry her (her half-brother!), even after he had rejected her. And her full-brother, Absalom, was so disgusted with the situation that he murdered Amnon. That’s how highly virginity in women was prized back then.

Critics of the Bible also point to Numbers 31 (and similar passages) in which the Israelites were allowed to take female captives from nations they conquered. Critics say this is an example of the Bible’s condoning or even promoting rape. However, the passage says nothing about raping the captive women. It is wrong to assume that the captive women were to be raped. The soldiers were commanded to purify themselves and their captives (verse 19). Rape would have violated this command (see Leviticus 15:16–18). The women who were taken captive are never referred to as sexual objects. Did the captive women likely eventually marry amongst the Israelites? Yes. Is there any indication that rape or sex slavery was forced upon the women? Absolutely not.

In the New Testament, rape is not mentioned directly, but within the Jewish culture of the day, rape would have been considered sexual immorality. Jesus and the apostles spoke against sexual immorality, even offering it as justifiable grounds for divorce (Matthew 5:32).

Further, the New Testament is clear that Christians are to obey the laws of their governing authorities (Romans 13). Not only is rape morally wrong; it is also wrong according to the laws of the land. As such, anyone who would commit this crime should expect to pay the consequences, including arrest and imprisonment.

To the victims of rape, we must offer much care and compassion. God’s Word often speaks about helping those in need and in vulnerable situations. Christians should model the love and compassion of Christ by assisting victims of rape in any way possible.

People are responsible for the sins they commit, including rape. However, no one is beyond the grace of God. Even to those who have committed the vilest of sins, God can extend forgiveness if they repent and turn from their evil ways (1 John 1:9). This does not remove the need for punishment according to the law, but it can offer hope and the way to a new life.
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

ATexasVol

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 4813
  • Liked:
I guess my point went over your head.   Or maybe you didn't notice the article was from 1998.   When Clinton was president, the MSM overwhelmingly fell into the "Who gives a rat's ass?" column.   Now that it's an affair involving Trump from a dozen years ago, you have Anderson Cooper teaming with CBS to do a lascivious interview with Stormy Daniels a'la  Jerry Springer.  

But as you recently admitted, it's okay with you that the media is biased.  You don't want them to present "both sides".   The truth has no place in the MSM/DNC's indoctrination of the public.  




harvestalvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
  • Liked:
So it's fine for Obama?

Obama Vacationed Alone With Reggie Love, Bans Media from Taking Pictures
Tuesday, February 19, 2013

The contents of this post may be upsetting to some of you unrepentant Obama apologists. You may want to sit this one out and wait for the next post which will be up shortly.


For years there have been rumors about President Barack Obama’s sexual preferences. To understand why I am entertaining the rumors today, I have to take you back to November 2011, when Obama’s “body man” Reggie Love resigned from his manufactured position as “deputy political director” to Mr. Obama.
At the time, the WH press pool that follows Obama everywhere speculated quietly that the president and Mr. Love had broken up. The rumor mongers within the press pool speculated that Love was asked to resign — so close to the November elections — because “compromising” pictures from his college days had surfaced online — and the pics were zooming along the Internet highway at such a rapid pace that the White House could not contain them.
According to this blog, the pictures purportedly showed a “heavily inebriated” Mr. Love performing a homosexual act on another male.
It was important for Reggie Love to tender his resignation if Mr. Obama had any hopes of being reelected. So, exit Mr. Love stage left.
Now, fast forward to this past week, when word leaked that the Obamas were taking separate vacations. As soon as the White House confirmed the reports, the devoted members of the Church of Obama dropped to their knees in fervent defense of their Savior.
One reader quipped: “When your relationship is strong and secure, you can take a separate vacay over a long weekend.” (Yea, sure. As if the reader wouldn’t snap if her husband even hinted that he was taking a separate vacation away from her.)



P1tchBlack

  • Guest
But publicly humiliating anyone for consensual adultery is draconian, and wrong.

I don't know if public humiliation is the answer but I do believe, in certain situations, the public has a right to know. The situation with Bill Clinton, for example, is more than just your everyday situation of cheating on your wife. He was the president and he was cheating with an intern. When you're the president, or any politician for that matter, your job is to make decisions. You aren't running reports, inputting data into a computer or doing anything else that the average person would do at their job. So, when you prove that your decision-making ability is that bad, the people that voted or could vote for you, need to know.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 12:13:13 PM by P1tchBlack »

BrownCounty

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3677
  • Liked:
Trump's 10 year-old son must be a basket case by now.

I would be more against the 1st amendment than the 2nd.  Our media is a national embarrassment and should be shut the hell up.

Sorry.

steve37777

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1629
  • Liked:
The dems are such a hoot.......

BrownCounty

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3677
  • Liked:
The dems are such a hoot.......
CNN is not even news right now.  It's the Stormy Daniels tabloid network.

If you switch between Fox and CNN, you'd think you were simultaneously living on two different planets.

Fox far and away more resembles news however, while CNN is just a mockery of its purported purpose.

 

Associate Links/Search