Tweet
Brothers in Christ, throughout history, rape has been viewed as a serious property crime against the man to whom the female belonged, typically the father or husband. The loss of virginity was an especially serious matter. God likes virgins and hates whores, as you know. The damage due to loss of virginity is reflected in the reduced prospects in finding a husband and in her bride price, all worries of a Christian father. This was especially true in the case of betrothed virgins, as the loss of chastity was perceived as severely depreciating her value to a prospective husband. In such cases, the law would void the betrothal and demand financial compensation from the rapist, payable to the woman's household, whose "goods" were "damaged".
The modern notion of the woman being a "victim" of some kind is not the traditional view of rape. Pity should be properly shown to the owner of the female, her husband or father.
Under Biblical law, the rapist is compelled to marry the unmarried woman instead of receiving any modern civil penalty, if her father agreed. This was especially prevalent in laws where the crime of rape did not include, as a necessary element, the violation of the woman's body, thus dividing the crime in the current meaning of rape and a means for a man and woman to force their families to permit marriage. (See Deuteronomy 22:28–29.)
The medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas argued that rape, though sinful, was much less unacceptable than masturbation or coitus interruptus, because it fulfilled the procreative function of sex, while the other acts violated the purpose of sex.
In Medieval Europe, a woman could be legally married by her parents to a stranger without her consent, and, once she was married, she could no longer refuse to consent to sex: the medieval concept of rape did not allow for the possibility of being raped by one's husband. In France, women were not granted the right to marry without parental consent until 1793, when communism became popular.
During the Colonization of the Americas, the rape of native women was not held to be a crime under Spanish Law as the persons in question were Pagan and not Christian. As is proper.
Given all this, why is it that the liberal pantywaistes these days want to glorify rape and turn all the attention on the female, rather than the rightful owner of the female? Why would they want to spit in God's loving face and ignore His law?
The Holy Bible covers "city rape"
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. -- Deuteronomy 22:23-24
And country rape
The rape of an unbetrothed virgin
And of course, the rape of prisoners of war
So, why is it that the limp-wristed liberals want to deny the common-sense solutions that God has wisely given us? 
Because they hate Jesus and they are hellbent on forcing us all into gay marriage, where rape will be a daily event! ON US!
The modern notion of the woman being a "victim" of some kind is not the traditional view of rape. Pity should be properly shown to the owner of the female, her husband or father.
Under Biblical law, the rapist is compelled to marry the unmarried woman instead of receiving any modern civil penalty, if her father agreed. This was especially prevalent in laws where the crime of rape did not include, as a necessary element, the violation of the woman's body, thus dividing the crime in the current meaning of rape and a means for a man and woman to force their families to permit marriage. (See Deuteronomy 22:28–29.)
The medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas argued that rape, though sinful, was much less unacceptable than masturbation or coitus interruptus, because it fulfilled the procreative function of sex, while the other acts violated the purpose of sex.
In Medieval Europe, a woman could be legally married by her parents to a stranger without her consent, and, once she was married, she could no longer refuse to consent to sex: the medieval concept of rape did not allow for the possibility of being raped by one's husband. In France, women were not granted the right to marry without parental consent until 1793, when communism became popular.
During the Colonization of the Americas, the rape of native women was not held to be a crime under Spanish Law as the persons in question were Pagan and not Christian. As is proper.
Given all this, why is it that the liberal pantywaistes these days want to glorify rape and turn all the attention on the female, rather than the rightful owner of the female? Why would they want to spit in God's loving face and ignore His law?
The Holy Bible covers "city rape"
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. -- Deuteronomy 22:23-24
But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. ... For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. -- Deuteronomy 22:25-27
If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days. -- Deuteronomy 22:28-29
And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. -- Numbers 31:15-18
Because they hate Jesus and they are hellbent on forcing us all into gay marriage, where rape will be a daily event! ON US!
Comment