Some try to flip Gods word against him, like the verse in Deutoronmy that talks about rape but I mean look at it…
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (KJV)
28 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;
29 Then the man that lay…
The perfect punishment for a rapist is spending his life with the woman he raped? Really? Not going to jail, or even being beaten or killed by the woman he raped, but spending his life with her? With a woman who obviously couldn’t defend herself the first time? And that’s the PERFECT punishment?? America, this is male privilege in action.
I mean the bible says an eye for an eye so why would God want the woman to kill him? If he was sent to jail do you know how hard it would be for that woman to find another husband? Virgins were highly sought after when it came to marriage so how many guys in that close nit community would want a woman who isnt a virgin and was raped? Rape is punished by imprisonment now and by death im some countries but that still doesnt stop it.
Sir, I’m beginning to think this is an argument you simply can’t understand because of your male privilege. Maybe if you were a woman, particuarly one who had endured sexual abuse, you could. Being a Christian, I know and admit that on one front, you are correct. God wouldn’t want the woman to kill him. Because vengeance belongs to the Lord. Love, which we all should have for everyone else, including those who hurt us, forgives all, and keeps no record of wrong. But being with a woman forever is NOT punishment for raping her (particularly if you believe he who findeth a wife findeth a good thing. Rape a woman you aren’t married to and have her as a wife? This is God’s intention? Please.) If a man doesn’t want to be with a woman who was raped, fine. Whatever. It’s not fair, because no woman asks for rape, hence it being rape, but it’s his perrogative. However, there are men out there who understand that sexual violence is NOT okay, and who have, and do, love women despite their history of sexual violence and the trauma that it leads to. Because a woman MIGHT not be able to find a husband she needs to stay with her rapist? Because a man takes a woman’s most precious gift forcefully he gets to keep it forever? This isn’t finder’s keepers. It’s RAPE. Why does she HAVE to be with a man anyway? Rape is one of the primary reasons many women become lesbians, or distrustful of men, or all people in general. There’s a very good chance that a rape victim doesn’t WANT to be with a man, or anyone else, so I don’t think worrying about her not being able to find a husband is a legitimate, or important, point to focus on after her rape. Because punishment doesn’t stop it, rapists should be able to keep the woman who they physically, mentally, and emotionally hurt, and they stole from? That’s not a solution to stopping rape; crime will be committed regardless of the punishment, it is now as it was in the Biblical days. If anything rapists would use this as an excuse to keep the woman that they want, but that doesn’t want them, forever. According to this logic, we should let every thief keep everything they stole, because not having to take anything else will keep them from stealing. This argument wouldn’t make so much sense if your car got stolen, and you couldn’t get it back. Or, worse yet, your sister, aunt, mother, grandmother, cousin, friend, or any other loved one got raped, and had to stay with their attacker forever. GETTING RAPED. Because honestly, who wants to keep having sex with the person that raped them once?
Furthermore, this COMPLETELY ignores the woman’s point of view. Her experience. Her mental, physical, and emotional struggle and state. You’re focusing on her “not being able to find a husband.” How about her not being able to trust anyone? How about her not being able to have children? How about the fact that BECAUSE she was raped, she feels that she can’t truly give her most precious gift to a man who deserves it? You’re completely ignoring the fact that rape is not a victimless crime. So your solution to stopping rape and making women feel better about not having a man is give her to her rapist forever?
Do you even understand You don’t understand that rape is generally about POWER over pleasure anyway. Therefore, having a rape victim, that you raped, as a wife would NOT stop rape; it would only encourage the rapist to go find someone else who he doesn’t already have power over, and exerting it. Guess what? More rape.
Lastly, PUNISHMENT and PREVENTION are 2 separate things. Let’s not punish rapists because it doesn’t prevent it? Okay. Let’s not punish murderers because people still kill people. Let’s not whoop kids because they still misbehave. Let’s not turn off ANY LIGHTS EVER, because we’ll still have an electricity bill. Nah bruh.
In my many studies, I’ve learned that privilege is honestly something that some people just can’t look past. So let me try to help you out, my brother. Let’s take white privilege. (Because it is, in so many ways, like male privilege.) According to your logic, if a man takes a man from his land without permission, and turns him into a slave, he should have to keep that slave FOREVER, in a really awkward slave-master union. Because who the hell wants to deal with a man that was a SLAVE?? He had his free will and labor taken from him without his permission?? No other employer will EVER want to deal with that shit. Besides, it would be SO AWKWARD for the slave owner! Now, do you feel like getting your ass out there picking cotton singing “Wade in the Water,” for massah, because at one point he took your ancestors without their permission?
"It would be the most awkward marriage." Yes sir, it would be, because it would be a damaged and abused woman with a man who she doesn’t like, doesn’t trust, and probably hates. Probably wants to kill. But, probably can’t. Because if she could, she would have when he was raping her. Awkward for the man, yeah. Men SHOULD feel uncomfortable about rape, just like domestic abuse. EVERYONE should feel uncomfortable about it, and if more men DID feel uncomfortable about it, perhaps we’d be getting somewhere. Perhaps 1 out of every 4 women in our society wouldn’t be sexual assualt victims. However, not enough men, or women, unfortunately, feel uncomfortable about it. Our society, including this post, promotes rape culture every day.
So, I’m sorry sir, but this is just not correct. Correct in it’s title, yes. Deuteronomy doesn’t promote rape. But it also doesn’t offer rapists rewards, or suggest rape victims settle in with their attacker and endure another lifetime of suffering because they couldn’t evade it the first time.
This isn’t an argument, it’s a discussion. Thats what kinda sucks about internet communication, the tone of voice is missing unless of course you use all caps, but then thats seen as an expression of anger. Anyways, I don’t think the purpose of God issuing this law only as a punishment was his only intention of it, but it was also to show how high he highly he regards our bodies. It was a sign of how much he treasures us limiting our sexual partners. Of course it’s a good thing to find a wife, but you have to take into account that no really righteous man who is really for the real God will commit rape, and rape is fornication so a sinful path to finding a wife isn’t a good thing. Yea I know theirs men out their who don’t mind a woman’s past, but you have to take into the account that this law was not written for our times. It was written for the very first Jews who were living in a very different time than we are now. So when thinking about this matter you have to try and put yourself in their shoes and that involves thinking about the aspects of their community. Think about the morals that God established for the Jewish community. If a man takes a woman’s virginity he keeps it whether he marry’s her or not. It’s not about a woman having to be with a man, its about limiting the amount of men she is with and limiting the amount of women the man is with. I’m sorry, I should have said what I said with more explanation behind it. Also think about what the roles of women were back then. Their roles were to stay at home and take care of the kids while the husband is out working. Most of the work back then was really physical so that was the way it had to be. So think about it this, what would the women be doing with themselves in those times if she had not been able to find a husband? I’m sorry but the thing about the thief is not a good metaphor. It lessens the quality of a woman’s virginity to that of a material object. There are many jobs black people are restricted from because they are black but a woman doesn’t get denied a job because she got raped. In fact, I think nowadays a woman would be more likely to get a job if she got raped because I would expect the person interviewing her to feel sympathy for her. Then again the topic of rape wouldn’t really come up in an interview.